Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). METHODS: Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. RESULTS: We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .

Global evidence of gender equity in academic health research: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To chart the global literature on gender equity in academic health research. DESIGN: Scoping review. PARTICIPANTS: Quantitative studies were eligible if they examined gender equity within academic institutions including health researchers. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes related to equity across gender and other social identities in academia: (1) faculty workforce: representation of all genders in university/faculty departments, academic rank or position and salary; (2) service: teaching obligations and administrative/non-teaching activities; (3) recruitment and hiring data: number of applicants by gender, interviews and new hires for various rank; (4) promotion: opportunities for promotion and time to progress through academic ranks; (5) academic leadership: type of leadership positions, opportunities for leadership promotion or training, opportunities to supervise/mentor and support for leadership bids; (6) scholarly output or productivity: number/type of publications and presentations, position of authorship, number/value of grants or awards and intellectual property ownership; (7) contextual factors of universities; (8) infrastructure; (9) knowledge and technology translation activities; (10) availability of maternity/paternity/parental/family leave; (11) collaboration activities/opportunities for collaboration; (12) qualitative considerations: perceptions around promotion, finances and support. RESULTS: Literature search yielded 94 798 citations; 4753 full-text articles were screened, and 562 studies were included. Most studies originated from North America (462/562, 82.2%). Few studies (27/562, 4.8%) reported race and fewer reported sex/gender (which were used interchangeably in most studies) other than male/female (11/562, 2.0%). Only one study provided data on religion. No other PROGRESS-PLUS variables were reported. A total of 2996 outcomes were reported, with most studies examining academic output (371/562, 66.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Reviewed literature suggest a lack in analytic approaches that consider genders beyond the binary categories of man and woman, additional social identities (race, religion, social capital and disability) and an intersectionality lens examining the interconnection of multiple social identities in understanding discrimination and disadvantage. All of these are necessary to tailor strategies that promote gender equity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

Global evidence of gender inequity in academic health research: a living scoping review protocol.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to describe the global evidence of gender inequity among individuals with appointments at academic institutions that conduct health research, and examine how gender intersects with other social identities to influence outcomes. INTRODUCTION: The gender demographics of universities have shifted, yet the characteristics of those who lead academic health research institutions have not reflected this change. Synthesized evidence will guide decision-making and policy development to support the progress of gender and other under-represented social identities in academia. INCLUSION CRITERIA: This review will consider any quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods primary research that reports outcome data related to gender equity and other social identities among individuals affiliated with academic or research institutions that conduct health research, originating from any country. METHODS: The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis and the Cochrane Collaboration's guidance on living reviews will inform the review methods. Information sources will include electronic databases, unpublished literature sources, reference scanning of relevant systematic reviews, and sources provided by experts on the research team. Searches will be run regularly to monitor the development of new literature and determine when the review will be updated. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by two reviewers working independently, and all discrepancies will be resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Data synthesis will summarize information using descriptive frequencies and simple thematic analysis. Results will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis extension to scoping reviews. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/8wk7e/.

Qualitative research: a review of methods with use of examples from the total knee replacement literature.

Qualitative research is a useful approach to explore perplexing or complicated clinical situations. Since 1996, at least fifteen qualitative studies in the area of total knee replacement alone were found. Qualitative studies overcome the limits of quantitative work because they can explicate deeper meaning and complexity associated with questions such as why patients decline joint replacement surgery, why they do not adhere to pain medication and exercise regimens, how they manage in the postoperative period, and why providers do not always provide evidence-based care. In this paper, we review the role of qualitative methods in orthopaedic research, using knee osteoarthritis as an illustrative example. Qualitative research questions tend to be inductive, and the stance of the investigator is relevant and explicitly acknowledged. Qualitative methodologies include grounded theory, phenomenology, and ethnography and involve gathering opinions and text from individuals or focus groups. The methods are rigorous and take training and time to apply. Analysis of the textual data typically proceeds with the identification, coding, and categorization of patterns in the data for the purpose of generating concepts from within the data. With use of analytic techniques, researchers strive to explain the findings; questions are asked to tease out different levels of meaning, identify new concepts and themes, and permit a deeper interpretation and understanding. Orthopaedic practitioners should consider the use of qualitative research as a tool for exploring the meaning and complexities behind some of the perplexing phenomena that they observe in research findings and clinical practice.

The moving target: a qualitative study of elderly patients' decision-making regarding total joint replacement surgery.

BACKGROUND: Total joint replacement is an accepted, cost-effective, and underutilized treatment for moderate-to-severe hip and knee arthritis. Yet, research has suggested that many patients with arthritis are unwilling to consider total joint replacement surgery. We sought to understand these patients' unwillingness by exploring the nature of their decision-making processes. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with seventeen individuals with moderate-to-severe arthritis who were appropriate candidates for, but unwilling to consider, total joint replacement. The interviews were analyzed with use of qualitative methods and content analysis techniques. RESULTS: Symptoms and information sources were the two main factors influencing patient decision-making. Participants engaged in individualized processes of trading off perceived costs and benefits. Accommodation to pain and disability and minimization of the quality-of-life benefit, in view of decreasing life span, led to a process whereby the threshold at which the benefits compared with the risks would tilt in favor of total joint replacement was constantly shifting, a phenomenon we called "the moving target." CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The moving-target characterization sheds light on patients' conceptions of their arthritis and on their unwillingness to consider total joint replacement. This process needs to be considered when developing ways to aid decision-making.

Relation between randomized controlled trials published in leading general medical journals and the global burden of disease.

BACKGROUND: More than two-thirds of the world's population live in low-income countries, where health priorities are different from those of people living in more affluent parts of the world. We evaluated the relation between the global burden of disease and conditions or diseases studied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in general medical journals. METHODS: A MEDLINE search identified 373 RCTs that had been published in 6 international peer-reviewed general medical journals in 1999. Manual review excluded non-RCTs, brief reports and trials in which the unit of randomization was not the patient; 286 RCTs remained eligible for analysis. We identified the RCTs that studied any of the 40 leading causes of the global burden of disease. Five of these conditions were considered unsuitable for study with an RCT design and were excluded from subsequent analysis. To provide a practical perspective, we asked 12 experts working with international health organizations to rate the relevance to global health of the articles that studied any of the top 10 causes of the global burden of disease, as measured by disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and mortality, using a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: Among the 286 RCTs in our sample, 124 (43.4%) addressed 1 of the 35 leading causes of the global burden of disease. Of these, ischemic heart disease, HIV/AIDS and cerebrovascular disease were the most commonly studied conditions. Ninety articles (31.5%) studied 1 of the top 10 causes of the global burden of disease. The mean rating (and standard deviation) for international health relevance assigned by experts was 2.6 (1.5) out of 5. Only 14 (16%) of the 90 trials received a rating of 4 or greater, indicating high relevance to international health. Almost half of the 40 leading causes of the global burden of disease were not studied by any trial. INTERPRETATION: Many conditions or diseases common internationally are underrepresented in RCTs published in leading general medical journals. Trials published in these journals that studied one of these high-priority conditions were generally rated as being of little relevance to international health.

The inclusion of minority groups in clinical trials: problems of under representation and under reporting of data.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the representation of minority groups in randomized control trials (RCTs), and the frequency with which this information is reported. STUDY DESIGN: Reviewers collected data on the racial/ethnic composition of study samples from all RCTs published in six leading medical journals in 1999. RESULTS: Of the 280 RCTs, most (204, 71.3%) provided no information on the race/ethnicity of participants. Of the 89 U.S.-based RCTs, 50 (56.1%) reported their minority distribution. Relative to other trials, those funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) (n = 52) were more likely to report race/ethnicity data (55.8% vs. 23.7%; x2 = 20.9, p <_0.001) and to include nonwhite participants (13.5 % vs. 12.5%; x2=22.7, p<_0.001). CONCLUSION: Minority groups are currently under-represented in clinical trials. Information on the race and ethnicity of clinical trial participants is currently underreported in six leading medical journals. Reporting of minority group information was significantly better only in NIH funded trials, which also were more likely to include nonwhite participants. This suggests that mandatory reporting policies may have a positive effect on both reporting and representation.

Intimate partner violence and health: a critique of Canadian prevalence studies.

OBJECTIVE: The Canadian Public Health Association, along with other professional organizations, has identified intimate partner violence (IPV) as a priority health issue to which the health professions must respond. This study synthesizes Canadian studies on the prevalence of IPV against women, focusing in particular on the stated implications for women's health and health care. METHODS: Medical and social science databases were searched for all articles pertaining to IPV in Canada for 1974 through September 2000. Reference lists of these and other related publications were consulted to supplement the literature review. Data on study characteristics, methods, and results were extracted by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Sixteen studies were identified in this review, 11 population-based and 5 conducted in clinical settings. Age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status were not consistently documented, making comparisons and evaluations of generalizability difficult. Annual prevalence of IPV in Canada was found to range from 0.4% to 23%, with severe violence occurring from 2% to 10% annually. Less than two fifths (37.5%) of the studies incorporated a health-related measure. INTERPRETATION: This review reveals a paucity of Canadian prevalence data on IPV, marked by design and methodological issues. Poor quality data may pose a challenge to articulating and establishing a coordinated health care response to eliminating IPV in Canada.

Representation of women's health in general medical versus women's health specialty journals: a content analysis.

BACKGROUND: Women's health, traditionally defined, emphasises reproductive and maternal conditions without consideration of social contexts. Advocates urge a broader conceptualisation. The medical literature influences the definitions and delivery of women's health care. We compared how women's health was represented in leading general medical (GM) versus women's health specialty (WS) journals. METHODS: Original investigations published between January 1 - June 30, 1999 in leading GM (n = 514) and WS (n = 82) journals were compared. Data were collected from 99 GM and 82 WS articles on women's health. Independent reviewers conducted content analyses of sample characteristics, study design, and health topic. Each article was classified as "Traditional" (e.g. menstruation, breast cancer), "Non-traditional" (e.g. abuse, osteoporosis), or "Both." RESULTS: Of the GM articles, 53 (53.5%) focused solely on a traditional women's health topic; half were reproductive and half female cancers. In contrast, 22 (26.8%) WS articles were traditionally focused. A non-traditional topic was the sole focus of 27 (27.3%) GM articles versus 34 (41.5%) WS articles. One-fifth of GM and one-third of WS articles addressed both. RCTs dominated the GM articles, while 40% of WS articles used qualitative or mixed study designs. Leading sources of women's death and disability were not well covered in either type of journal. CONCLUSIONS: Most GM articles drew on a narrow definition of women's health. WS journals provided more balanced coverage, addressing social concerns in addition to "navel-to-knees" women's health. Since GM journals have wide impact, editorial decisions and peer review processes should promote a broader conceptualisation of women's health.

"You're perfect for the procedure! Why don't you want it?" Elderly arthritis patients' unwillingness to consider total joint arthroplasty surgery: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the process by which elderly persons make decisions about a surgical treatment, total joint arthroplasty (TJA). METHODS: In-depth interviews with 17 elderly individuals identified as potential candidates for TJA who were unwilling to undergo the procedure. RESULTS: For the majority of participants, decision making involved ongoing deliberation of the surgical option, often resulting in a deferral of the treatment decision. Three assumptions may constrain elderly persons from making a decision about surgery. First, some participants viewed osteoarthritis not as a disease but as a normal part of aging. Second, despite being candidates for TJA according to medical criteria, many participants believed candidacy required a level of pain and disability higher than their current level. Third, some participants believed that if they either required or would benefit from TJA, their physicians would advise surgery. CONCLUSION: These assumptions may limit the possibility for shared decision making. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Emphasis should be directed toward thinking about ways in which discussions about TJA might be initiated (and by whom) and considering how patients' views on and knowledge of osteoarthritis in general might be addressed.

The impact of policy changes on the health of recent immigrants and refugees in the inner city. A qualitative study of service providers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Dramatic changes to health and social policy have taken place in Ontario over the last five years with few attempts to measure their impact on health outcomes. This study explored service providers' opinions about the impact of four major policy changes on the health of recent immigrant and refugee communities in Toronto's inner city. METHODS: Semi-structured key informant interviews. RESULTS: Reductions in funding for welfare, hospitals and community agencies were seen to have had major effects on the health of newcomers. Emergent themes included erosion of the social determinants of health, reduced access to health care, increased need for advocacy, deterioration in mental health, and an increase in wife abuse. CONCLUSIONS: Several areas were identified where policy changes were perceived to have had a negative impact on the health of recent immigrants and refugees. This study provides insights for policy-makers, inner-city planners and researchers conducting population-based studies of immigrant health.