Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40822551›Full record

ArticleMethodsX2025

Exploring the definitions of gender bias in healthcare literature: a scoping review protocol.

Silvia Bargeri, Laura A Schaap, Greta Castellini, Silvia Gianola, Tiziano Innocenti, Raymond Ostelo, Rossella Tomaiuolo, Andres Vidal-Itriago, Sidney Rubinstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MethodsX, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Silvia BargeriUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Laura A SchaapDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Greta CastelliniUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Silvia GianolaUnit of Clinical Epidemiology, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Tiziano InnocentiDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Raymond OsteloDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Rossella TomaiuoloIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Andres Vidal-ItriagoMedical Library, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Sidney RubinsteinDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Despite growing recognition of gender bias in healthcare, there is a lack of clarity on how gender bias is defined and understood in the literature. Existing definitions often did not consider modern gender constructs, limiting their applicability to current healthcare practices. In order to address these issues, we aim to perform a scoping review (ScR) to systematically explore what definitions and which characteristics of gender bias are found in the literature. Methods: This protocol follows the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for ScR and reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A comprehensive search strategy will be performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and other relevant sources (date of last search: January, 15th 2025). We will include any studies that aim to provide structured definitions or conceptual frameworks to define and/or understand gender bias within healthcare clinical settings. Data will be charted using a standardized form to capture the characteristics of definitions, along with the healthcare population and contexts where gender bias has been described. Definitions will be described assessing their relevance from an analytical perspective and their potential for implementation. The findings will be summarized descriptively, with summary tables and figures to highlight key characteristics of the included studies.

Indexed as

DefinitionsGender biasGender inequitiesGender stereotypesScoping review

Identifiers

PMID40822551
PMCPMC12355544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.