SynthesisBMC medical education2026
Educational strategies for integrating gender perspectives in health professions training: a systematic review to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion.
Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Health center staff perceptions of gender and equity in the Conakry health region, Guinea (2025): a cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Collaborative, digital and sustainable skills through multimodal simulations: evidence-based, interprofessional training in primary health care - the REALISE study.Advances in simulation (London, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreparing health professionals to deliver equitable, culturally competent care requires integrating gender perspectives throughout medical training. While essential for addressing health disparities affecting women, men, and gender-diverse populations, implementation approaches vary widely across institutions and regions. Evidence on effective strategies remains fragmented. This systematic review synthesizes educational interventions for gender-sensitive training, evaluates outcomes on student competencies, and examines global research patterns to identify equity gaps in the scholarship itself.
methodsFollowing PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we conducted a prospectively registered systematic review (PROSPERO CRD420251132158). We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus for studies published between 2015 and 2025 that evaluated educational strategies for integrating gender perspectives in health professions training. Two independent reviewers performed screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal using a generic risk-of-bias tool. Thematic synthesis identified core educational strategy domains and their effectiveness. We complemented this with bibliometric mapping (co-citation, co-authorship, co-word analysis) to examine geographic distribution of research, international collaboration patterns, and conceptual evolution in the field.
resultsTwenty-four studies met inclusion criteria from 133 records. Six educational strategy domains emerged from thematic synthesis: curricular design, active learning methodologies, faculty development, assessment systems, digital technologies, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Interventions consistently improved clinical knowledge of gender-diverse health needs, recognition and reduction of implicit bias, ethical sensitivity, and gender-affirming communication skills. Bibliometric analysis revealed striking geographic concentration: 72.2% of research originates from European institutions (38% from Germany alone), with minimal international collaboration (12.5) and virtually no Global South representation. This pattern highlights persistent inequities in whose perspectives shape DEI frameworks in medical education.
conclusionsIntegrating gender perspectives into health professions education represents an evidence-based strategy for advancing DEI principles and preparing providers to deliver equitable, culturally competent care. Effective implementation requires dedicated institutional commitment through three key mechanisms: dedicated change agents who champion gender equity, formal structural integration rather than ad-hoc interventions, and systematic faculty development programs. However, the geographic concentration of research in high-income Western contexts raises critical questions about equity in DEI scholarship itself. Achieving gender equity in healthcare globally requires parallel commitments: integrating gender-sensitive curricula in all institutions while ensuring that diverse global voices, especially from the Global South, meaningfully shape DEI discourse and frameworks.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420251132158.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.