Gender equality: Framing a special collection of evidence for all

Darmstadt, Gary L.

doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2020.100307

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…All of these results could be explained by the current rules and standards of aesthetics and social conduct, based on gender, race, and class roles that have an impact on all individuals. 6,12,33 These expected behaviours, habits, and attitudes directly contribute to the construction of prejudices and discriminatory situations against those who do not follow the standard. 1,12 Use of characteristics as a focus of discrimination is extremely harmful, leading to low self-esteem, distorted views of the body itself, situations of selfharm, and health risk behaviours.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[37][38][39] Numerous factors can influence this effect, such as situations of harassment and discrimination in the professional environment, exhaustive working hours including chores and childcare responsibilities, and cultural barriers. 33,37,40 In the literature, situations in which sexual orientation is the reason for discrimination are well reported. 41 In a Canadian study, 60.7% of young people interviewed reported having experienced some form of homophobic bullying.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Discrimination and dental students: What is the reality in Brazilian institutions?

Sartori

Henzel

Chisini

et al. 2023

Eur J Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis study aimed to evaluate whether there is discrimination in the dental educational environment, assess the main reasons for the discriminatory events, and if there is an association between discriminatory episodes and sociodemographic characteristics of undergraduate dental students.Materials and MethodsThis observational cross‐sectional study was conducted with a self‐administered questionnaire to students enrolled in three Brazilian dental schools. Questions included sociodemographic characteristics and the occurrence of discriminatory episodes in the dental academic environment. Descriptive analysis was performed in RStudio 1.3 (R Core Team, RStudio, Inc., Boston, USA) software and the associations were tested using Pearson's chi‐square test, considering 95% confidence intervals.ResultsA total of 732 dental students were included, with a response rate of 70.2%. The vast majority of students were female (66.9%), with white/yellow skin colour (67.9%), and with a mean age of 22.6 (SD 4.1) years. Sixth‐eight percent of students reported having experienced some discrimination in the academic environment and most reported feeling uncomfortable with the episode. The main reasons to have been discriminated against raised by students were specific behaviour/habit, have specific moral, ethical, and aesthetic values, gender, and socioeconomic status or social class. The occurrence of discriminatory episodes was associated with female gender (p = .05), non‐heterosexual sexual orientation (p < .001), studying in public institutions (p < .001), receiving an institutional scholarship (p = .018), and being in the final undergraduate cycle (p < .001).ConclusionThe occurrence of discriminatory episodes was common in Brazilian dental higher education. Discriminatory situations generate traumas and psychological marks, causing a loss of diversity within the academic environment that leads to loss of productivity, creativity, and innovation. Thus, strong institutional policies against discrimination are crucial to create a healthy dental academic environment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrimination and dental students: What is the reality in Brazilian institutions?

Sartori

Henzel

Chisini

et al. 2023

Eur J Dental Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We structured the final search strategy around three elements, with each required to appear in titles or abstracts of selected studies 1 : gender discrimination-related terms, 2 health terms and 3 LMICs context-related terms. This strategy is represented in table 2 .…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gender-based discrimination (GBD), gender inequalities and restrictive gender norms lead to poor performance in the delivery of good health and have pervasive effects that hold back societies, and especially women and girls within them, from achieving their full development. 1 The concept sits at the core of goal 5 (Gender Equality) and goal 10 (Reduced Inequalities) of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). 2 GBD is increasingly being recognised as an important factor affecting healthcare access and well-being.…”

Section: Introduction Background and General Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Protocol for a scoping review of measures and definitions of gender-based discrimination linked to health outcomes in low and middle-income countries

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionGender-based discrimination (GBD) is generally defined as unequal or disadvantageous treatment based on one’s gender. Emerging evidence suggests that exposure to GBD in its various forms can yield negative consequences for women’s health, including delaying access to healthcare services and lowering the quality of nutrition. Although consensus exists around the theoretical definitions of GBD, current studies are limited on how to measure GBD empirically in order to assess its true impact on women’s health. Our mixed-methods scoping review aims at synthesising existing evidence by answering the questionHow is gender-based discrimination defined and measured in the health literature, with specific reference to Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs)?. Our ambition is to identify commonalities across definitions and measures to generate a dialogue towards reaching consensus around the development of a single standardised tool to be applied in health studies.Methods and analysisOur mixed-method scoping review includes quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods studies and unfolds according to the six stages proposed by Levacet al. Eligibility criteria for studies were defined in order to reflect the three core elements of the search, namely (1) the discrimination based on the gender, (2) the link to health outcomes and (3) the developing countries context. Four databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cinahl and Econlit) were searched. We will extract and synthesise information from quantitative and qualitative studies following the framework proposed by Hong and use the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review tool as a guide.Ethics and disseminationSince our scoping review relies exclusively on information extracted from published articles, its conduct is not subjected to ethical clearance. Results will be described and discussed in a peer-reviewed article and presented at relevant workshops and conferences.

show abstract

“…A collection of evidence on gender equality published in EClinicalMedicine discusses the systemic nature of restrictive gender norms in science and medicine, and calls attention to the importance of institutional interventions to overcome restrictive gender norms [1] . Inequality is deep-rooted in science and medicine while evaluation of interventions show a very slow progress and often unintended consequences [2] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%