[Gender in epidemiology. State of discussion and perspectives]

Consideration of sex/gender in publications of quantitative health-related research: Development and application of an assessment matrix

During the last years the need to integrate sex and gender in health-related research for better and fairer science became increasingly apparent. Various guidelines and checklists were developed to encourage and support researchers in considering the entangled dimensions of sex/gender in their research. However, a tool for the assessment of sex/gender consideration and its visualization is still missing. We aim to fill this gap by introducing an assessment matrix that can be used as a flexible instrument for comprehensively evaluating the sex/gender consideration in quantitative health-related research. The matrix was developed through an iterative and open process based on the interdisciplinary expertise represented in our research team and currently published guidelines. The final matrix consists of 14 different items covering the whole research process and the publication of results. Additionally, we introduced a method to graphically display this evaluation. By developing the matrix, we aim to provide users with a tool to systematically compare sex/gender consideration qualitatively between different publications and even different fields of study. This way, the assessment matrix represents a tool to identify research gaps and a basis for future research. In the long term, the implementation of this tool to evaluate the consideration of sex/gender should contribute to more sex/gender equitable health-related research.

Representation of gender in migrant health studies - a systematic review of the social epidemiological literature

Background

Gender as a social construct contributes to determine who migrates and which migration-related risks and opportunities emerge in all phases of the migration trajectory. Simultaneously, migration influences the individual as well as societal definition and perception of gender roles. An explicit gender perspective in migration-related epidemiological research can contribute to adequately analyse and interpret the health of migrants. This systematic review gives a comprehensive overview on how gender has been conceptualised, operationalised and measured in social epidemiologic studies aiming to assess the influence of gender on health among migrants.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, EconLit and PsycINFO and conducted backward reference searching. Reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data and conducted the quality assessment. Eligible studies actively aimed to understand, identify or explain the influence of gender on migrants’ health, whereby the role of gender can encompass a variety of mechanisms, processes or states of differentiation, discrimination and/or inequality.

Results

Almost all of the 43 studies were cross-sectional and focussed on health outcomes in the post-migration phase. The most common theme of research was the health of male migrants in the US, and in particular of men who have sex with men (MSM). All studies treated gender as a binary variable (men vs. women), without discussing additional types of gender identities. A minority of studies differentiated clearly between sex and gender. Gender was mostly operationalised through attitudes toward gender roles and gender-based discrimination, experienced at the individual level. Community and societal level gender measures capturing structural gender determinants were underrepresented.

Conclusions

The intersections of migration and gender suggested synergistic effects on health that only become visible when considering those two social determinants together. Future research needs to embrace a multilevel and non-binary understanding of gender and reflect on the influence of gender in the different phases of the migration journey.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42019124698.

Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006-2014

BACKGROUND

During the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research practice. The aim of this study is to provide good practice examples of sex/gender sensitive health research.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of research articles published in JECH between 2006 and 2014. An instrument was constructed to evaluate sex/gender sensitivity in four stages of the research process (background, study design, statistical analysis, discussion).

RESULTS

In total, 37 articles covering diverse topics were included. Thereof, 22 were evaluated as good practice example in at least one stage; two articles achieved highest ratings across all stages. Good examples of the background referred to available knowledge on sex/gender differences and sex/gender informed theoretical frameworks. Related to the study design, good examples calculated sample sizes to be able to detect sex/gender differences, selected sex/gender sensitive outcome/exposure indicators, or chose different cut-off values for male and female participants. Good examples of statistical analyses used interaction terms with sex/gender or different shapes of the estimated relationship for men and women. Examples of good discussions interpreted their findings related to social and biological explanatory models or questioned the statistical methods used to detect sex/gender differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified good practice examples may inspire researchers to critically reflect on the relevance of sex/gender issues of their studies and help them to translate methodological recommendations of sex/gender sensitivity into research practice.

Justice and Equity Implications of Climate Change Adaptation: A Theoretical Evaluation Framework

Climate change affects human health, and climate change adaptation aims to reduce these risks through infrastructural, behavioral, and technological measures. However, attributing direct human health effects to climate change adaptation is difficult, causing an ethical dilemma between the need for evidence of strategies and their precautionary implementation before such evidence has been generated. In the absence of conclusive evidence for individual adaptation strategies, alternative approaches to the measurement of adaptation effectiveness need to be developed. This article proposes a theoretical framework and a set of guiding questions to assess effects of adaptation strategies on seven domains of health determinants, including social, economic, infrastructure, institutional, community, environmental, and cultural determinants of health. Its focus on advancing gender equity and environmental justice concurrently with the implementation of health-related adaptation could serve as a template for policymakers and researchers.