Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 20
Filter
Add more filters











Publication year range
1.
Nat Med ; 30(8): 2111, 2024 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38992124
4.
Soc Sci Med ; 315: 115511, 2022 12.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36371930

ABSTRACT

Pandemic preparedness and COVID-19 response indicators focus on public health outcomes (such as infections, case fatalities, and vaccination rates), health system capacity, and/or the effects of the pandemic on the economy, yet this avoids more political questions regarding how responses were mobilized. Pandemic preparedness country rankings have been called into question due to their inability to predict COVID-19 response and outcomes, and COVID-19 response indicators have ignored one of the most well documented secondary effects of the pandemic - its disproportionate effects on women. This paper analyzes pandemic preparedness and response indicators from a feminist perspective to understand how indicators might consider the secondary effects of the pandemic on women and other equity deserving groups. Following a discussion of the tensions that exist between feminist methodologies and the reliance on indicators by policymakers in preparing and responding to health emergencies, we assess the strengths and weakness of current pandemic preparedness and COVID-19 response indicators. The risk with existing pandemic preparedness and response indicators is that they give only limited attention to secondary effects of pandemics and inequities in terms of who is disproportionately affected. There is an urgent need to reconceptualize what 'successful' pandemic preparedness and response entails, moving beyond epidemiological and economic measurements. We suggest how efforts to design COVID response indicators on gender inclusion could inform pandemic preparedness and associated indicators.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Female , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control
5.
Lancet ; 400(10361): 1398-1399, 2022 10 22.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36273471
6.
Lancet ; 399(10337): 1778, 2022 05 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35483399
7.
Lancet ; 399(10320): 136-137, 2022 01 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34998498
8.
Health Policy Plan ; 37(7): 935-941, 2022 Aug 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34894132

ABSTRACT

Evidence shows that infectious disease outbreaks are not gender-neutral, meaning that women, men and gender minorities are differentially affected. This evidence affirms the need to better incorporate a gender lens into infectious disease outbreaks. Despite this evidence, there has been a historic neglect of gender-based analysis in health, including during health crises. Recognizing the lack of available evidence on gender and pandemics in early 2020 the Gender and COVID-19 project set out to use a gender analysis matrix to conduct rapid, real-time analyses while the pandemic was unfolding to examine the gendered effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. This paper reports on what a gender analysis matrix is, how it can be used to systematically conduct a gender analysis, how it was implemented within the study, ways in which the findings from the matrix were applied and built upon, and challenges encountered when using the matrix methodology.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Communicable Diseases , COVID-19/epidemiology , Disease Outbreaks , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
11.
J Migr Health ; 3: 100037, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33817682

ABSTRACT

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses particular challenges for migrant workers around the world. This study explores the unique experiences of foreign domestic workers (FDWs) in Hong Kong, and how COVID-19 impacted their health and economic wellbeing. Interviews with FDWs (n = 15) and key informants (n = 3) were conducted between May and August 2020. FDWs reported a dual-country experience of the pandemic, where they expressed concerns about local transmission risks as well as worries about their family members in their home country. Changes to their current work situation included how their employers treated them, as well as their employment status. FDWs also cited blind spots in the Hong Kong policy response that also affected their experience of the pandemic, including a lack of support from the Hong Kong government. Additional support is needed to mitigate the particularly negative effects of the pandemic on FDWs.

12.
Glob Public Health ; 16(8-9): 1364-1380, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33705248

ABSTRACT

Gender norms, roles and relations differentially affect women, men, and non-binary individuals' vulnerability to disease. Outbreak response measures also have immediate and long-term gendered effects. However, gender-based analysis of outbreaks and responses is limited by lack of data and little integration of feminist analysis within global health scholarship. Recognising these barriers, this paper applies a gender matrix methodology, grounded in feminist political economy approaches, to evaluate the gendered effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and response in four case studies: China, Hong Kong, Canada, and the UK. Through a rapid scoping of documentation of the gendered effects of the outbreak, it applies the matrix framework to analyse findings, identifying common themes across the case studies: financial discrimination, crisis in care, and unequal risks and secondary effects. Results point to transnational structural conditions which put women on the front lines of the pandemic at work and at home while denying them health, economic and personal security - effects that are exacerbated where racism and other forms of discrimination intersect with gender inequities. Given that women and people living at the intersections of multiple inequities are made additionally vulnerable by pandemic responses, intersectional feminist responses should be prioritised at the beginning of any crises.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Feminism , Pandemics , Politics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Canada/epidemiology , China/epidemiology , Female , Hong Kong/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Socioeconomic Factors , United Kingdom/epidemiology
15.
Lancet ; 395(10226): 776-777, 2020 03 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32145783
17.
Lancet ; 394(10214): 2057-2058, 2019 12 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32673583
18.
Soc Sci Med ; 159: 22-9, 2016 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27155226

ABSTRACT

Partnership is a key idea in current debates about global health and development assistance, yet little is known about what partnership means to those who are responsible for operationalising it or how it is experienced in practice. This is particularly the case in the context of African health systems. This paper explores how health professionals working in global health hubs and the health systems of South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia understand and experience partnership. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with 101 professionals based in each country, Washington DC and Geneva between October 2012 and June 2013, the paper makes four key arguments. First, partnership has a legitimating function in global health policy processes for international development institutions, government agencies and civil society organisations alike. Second, the practice of partnership generates idiosyncratic and complicated relationships that health professionals have to manage and navigate, often informally. Third, partnership is shaped by historical legacies, critical events, and independent consultants. Fourth, despite being an accepted part of global health policy, there is little shared understanding of what good partnership is meant to include or resemble in practice. Knowing more about the specific socio-cultural and political dynamics of partnership in different health system contexts is critical to equip health professionals with the skills to build the informal relations that are essential to effective partnership engagement.


Subject(s)
Capacity Building/methods , Global Health , International Cooperation , Social Planning , Africa , Developing Countries , Health Policy/trends , Humans , Public Health/methods , Qualitative Research , Workforce
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL