Does Gender Bias Exist in the Use of Specialist Health Care?

Author:

Raine Rosalind1

Affiliation:

1. Health Services Research Unit, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK

Abstract

Objectives: To investigate the evidence for the existence of gender bias (defined as care provided independently of clinical need) in the use of specialist services by critically appraising the literature. Methods: A computer-assisted search of the bibliographic databases PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Healthstar and Social Science Citation Index for English language papers published from 1966 until May 1999. In addition, four journals were handsearched and the reference lists of identified papers were explored. Retrospective studies were only used when there were insufficient prospective studies. Results: One hundred and thirty-eight studies were identified covering five major topics: coronary artery disease; renal transplantation; human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS); mental illness; and other (mainly invasive) procedures. The majority (94) examined coronary artery disease. It appears that men are more likely to undergo non-invasive investigations than women, but that subsequent investigation and treatment shows no clear evidence of gender differences. Men are more likely to undergo renal transplantation and, for those with HIV and AIDS, to receive azidothymidine (zidovudine, AZT) than women. There are some indications that disparities in favour of men also occur for those suffering from cardiac arrhythmias and cerebrovascular disease, and for those undergoing vascular surgery, hip replacement and heart transplantation. In contrast, women are more likely to undergo liver transplantation and cataract surgery. Mental health services may be provided differently for men and women. All these findings are limited by a lack of accurate denominator information and insufficient ability to adjust for prognostic factors. Conclusions: Differences in health care use can be due to demand factors (e.g. differences in the prevalence and severity of disease or in patient preferences), supply factors (particularly clinical judgement), or both. There is a need to examine these explanations thoroughly for gender inequalities in order to ensure that equity (lack of bias) is achieved. There is also a need for higher quality studies if differences are to be attributed conclusively to bias or not.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

Cited by 51 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3