ArticlePloS one2026
Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals: A multicenter cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundPhysician sex can influence communication, comfort, and care-seeking. Evidence from conservative contexts suggests preferences are strongest in intimate examinations and vary by specialty. Local data from Syria are limited.
methodsWe conducted a multicenter cross-sectional survey in major Syrian public teaching hospitals. Adults attending participating hospitals, including patients and accompanying companions, completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire adapted from prior work and reviewed for clarity in Arabic, capturing preference for physician sex (male, female, no preference) across (i) attitudinal domains, (ii) common clinical interactions (e.g., history taking, general and intimate examinations, emergencies, procedures), and (iii) medical specialties. Demographics included age, participant sex, marital status, education, religion, religiosity, and income. Associations were assessed using chi-square tests and multinomial logistic regression with "no preference" as the reference category.
resultsAcross attitudinal domains and routine interactions, many participants reported no preference. In sensitive contexts, particularly intimate examinations, sex-concordant care was frequently preferred. Female participants tended to prefer female physicians for intimate and reproductive health encounters, whereas male participants more often preferred male physicians for general and intimate examinations. By specialty, preference for male physicians was more common in surgery-related fields (e.g., general surgery, orthopedics, urology), while preference for female physicians predominated in obstetrics/gynecology and select relational specialties (e.g., psychiatry, dermatology). In emergency or life-threatening scenarios, neutrality was common. Exploratory adjusted analyses identified several demographic associations, with participant sex showing the most consistent pattern across multiple contexts.
conclusionsPreferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals were context-dependent, peaking in intimate examinations and varying by specialty. Ensuring feasible options for sex-concordant care in selected services, alongside communication training for all clinicians, may improve comfort and engagement among hospital attendees. Future research should evaluate how these preferences affect care utilization and outcomes, and explore clinician factors (e.g., seniority, communication style) that may mitigate or amplify preference effects.
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.