ArticleScandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine2026
Sex and gender bias in major trauma care: a scoping review.
Article in Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Need-standardised comparisons must not become a barrier to recognising and addressing sex and gender disparities in major trauma care.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Prehospital endotracheal intubation and 30-day survival in severe trauma: a matched cohort study from Navarra, Spain.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Need-standardised comparisons are required before inferring sex and gender bias in major trauma care.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSex/gender bias have been well-documented in clinical medicine. However, few studies have assessed sex/gender disparities specifically in major trauma care. This scoping review aims to explore sex and gender-based differences in the emergency management of severely injured patients.
methodsA systematic literature review was conducted in the following electronic databases: Medline Ovid ALL, Embase, CINAHL with Full Text, Web of Science Core Collection, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials with search criteria including keywords and mesh terms: gender, sex, major trauma, wounds and injuries. Three reviewers conducted the article selection.
resultsSeventy-four full-text articles were included in the study. Main themes of sex/gender-based differences were mechanism of injury, severity of trauma, trauma triage, trauma care, mortality, and complications. Women were older with more low-energy trauma than men. Women were more likely to suffer from pelvic and spinal cord injuries. Women were more likely to be under-triaged and under-treated. Sex/gender-based differences in mortality were inconsistent across studies. Adjusted mortality appeared similar between women and men, with conflicting evidence of increased mortality in men in some studies.
conclusionWomen received less trauma care and were less likely to be transported to a trauma centre. These disparities are not fully explained by differences in injury mechanism or severity and instead appear to reflect modifiable features of trauma systems, particularly triage and transfer practices. Addressing these inequities will require system-level changes to ensure that access to specialist trauma care is based on clinical need rather than sex or gender.
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.