Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40974329›Full record

ArticleCanadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie2026

Changing Patterns of Gender Representation in Canada's Technology Sector and the Care Economy: Two Differing Tales.

Neil Guppy, Maya Balzarini, Kamila Kolpashnikova, Katherine Lyon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian review of sociology = Revue canadienne de sociologie, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Neil GuppyDepartment of Sociology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8338-8770
Maya BalzariniDepartment of Sociology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Kamila KolpashnikovaDepartment of Sociology, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Katherine LyonDepartment of Sociology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gender segregation is a persistent form of labour market inequality, though patterns differ across time and economic sectors. Focusing on the care economy and the technology sector, we examine longitudinal trends in gender distributions for educational credentials and occupational participation. This sector-specific analysis reveals two polarized patterns of gender segregation. In market-based care activities, labour force gender imbalance is intensifying even in the face of labour shortages. Fewer men are found in most care and communal fields of study and occupations. In the technology sector, and despite concerted efforts to improve gender balance, little change has occurred in the share of women in computing, engineering, and physics. This lack of gender change in key subfields of the technology sector is, however, often obscured by women's increasing prominence in the biological and life sciences. While there has been a historic erosion of gender segregation in Canadian schooling and the labour force, the current extent of segregation remains high, and its erosion has not only stalled in the technology sector but also in the care sector, where gender imbalance is seriously worsening. In both sectors, gender-responsive recruitment is essential, but recruitment must be nuanced and targeted to specific fields of study and occupations.

Indexed as

EmploymentHealth Care SectorOccupationsSexismTechnologyCanadaFemaleGender EquityHumansMalecare economygenderlabour marketsegregationtechnology

Identifiers

PMID40974329
PMCPMC12917348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.