A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination
Abstract Gender discrimination (GD) has been frequently linked to mental health. The heterogeneity of GD definition has led to different assessment methodologies and variation around the analysis of GD. This can affect the study of the association between GD and health outcomes. The main goal of thi...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of public health 2019-11, Vol.29 (Supplement_4) |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | Supplement_4 |
| container_start_page | |
| container_title | European journal of public health |
| container_volume | 29 |
| creator | de la Torre, L Oliver, A Torres, X Bertran, M J |
| description | Abstract
Gender discrimination (GD) has been frequently linked to mental health. The heterogeneity of GD definition has led to different assessment methodologies and variation around the analysis of GD. This can affect the study of the association between GD and health outcomes. The main goal of this systematic scoping review is the review of previous studies to operationalize the definition of the GD construct.
Three search strategies were set in Pubmed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. 1st and 2nd search strategies included studies if their main focus was either, the analysis of discrimination perception, triggers of discrimination or the analysis of GD effects and associated factors to its perception. 3rd strategy was focused on the identification of GD questionnaires. The prevalence of GD, factors and consequences associated with GD perception and forms of discrimination were the principal variables collected. Risk of bias was assessed (PROSPERO: CRD42019120719).
A total of 925 studies were obtained and 84 papers included. GD analysis environments were described. 60 questionnaires of discrimination were identified. Prevalence of GD varied between 3.4-67%. Female gender and a younger age were the factors most frequently related to GD. Poorer mental health was the most frequent consequence. Two components of the GD construct were identified: undervaluation (different recognition, opportunities in access, evaluation standards and expectations) and different treatment (verbal abuse and behavior).
GD is measured in several environments and with different methodologies. The two component definition of GD can add order and precision to the measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.
Key messages
The heterogeneity in the conception of gender discrimination has led to different ways of assessment and to a great heterogeneity around the analysis of GD perception.
This operative gender discrimination construct could add order and precision to its measurement, increase response rates and reported GD. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_TOX</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2430177934</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200</oup_id><sourcerecordid>2430177934</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1500-f69e275cd866b4e97d5e6616f157aa7be815eef1aa9deca531b569b60a7120993</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwANwscSWtN4nt-lhV_EkVXEDiZjnOpk2hcbAdUHl6jMIDcNo5zMyOPkIugc2AqWKOg--Ham7fvmEhZzljR2QCpSizQrDX46SBQQa5yE_JWQg7xhiXi3xCHpc0HELEvYmtpcG6vu021ONni180Omr63jtjtzRukVrXhegHG6lr6Aa7Gj2t22B9u2-7VOC6c3LSmPeAF393Sl5ub55X99n66e5htVxnFjhjWSMU5pLbeiFEVaKSNUchQDTApTGywgVwxAaMUTVawwuouFCVYEZCzpQqpuRq7E3rPgYMUe_c4Lv0UudlwUBKVZTJBaPLeheCx0b3aarxBw1M_2LTIzY9YtMJW8pcjxk39P-w_wDv3XLJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2430177934</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination</title><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><creator>de la Torre, L ; Oliver, A ; Torres, X ; Bertran, M J</creator><creatorcontrib>de la Torre, L ; Oliver, A ; Torres, X ; Bertran, M J</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract
Gender discrimination (GD) has been frequently linked to mental health. The heterogeneity of GD definition has led to different assessment methodologies and variation around the analysis of GD. This can affect the study of the association between GD and health outcomes. The main goal of this systematic scoping review is the review of previous studies to operationalize the definition of the GD construct.
Three search strategies were set in Pubmed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. 1st and 2nd search strategies included studies if their main focus was either, the analysis of discrimination perception, triggers of discrimination or the analysis of GD effects and associated factors to its perception. 3rd strategy was focused on the identification of GD questionnaires. The prevalence of GD, factors and consequences associated with GD perception and forms of discrimination were the principal variables collected. Risk of bias was assessed (PROSPERO: CRD42019120719).
A total of 925 studies were obtained and 84 papers included. GD analysis environments were described. 60 questionnaires of discrimination were identified. Prevalence of GD varied between 3.4-67%. Female gender and a younger age were the factors most frequently related to GD. Poorer mental health was the most frequent consequence. Two components of the GD construct were identified: undervaluation (different recognition, opportunities in access, evaluation standards and expectations) and different treatment (verbal abuse and behavior).
GD is measured in several environments and with different methodologies. The two component definition of GD can add order and precision to the measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.
Key messages
The heterogeneity in the conception of gender discrimination has led to different ways of assessment and to a great heterogeneity around the analysis of GD perception.
This operative gender discrimination construct could add order and precision to its measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1101-1262</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-360X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Abuse ; Bias ; Discrimination ; Gender ; Heterogeneity ; Mental health ; Perception ; Public health ; Questionnaires ; Rates ; Response rates ; Responses ; Reviews ; Search methods ; Sex discrimination ; Systematic review</subject><ispartof>European journal of public health, 2019-11, Vol.29 (Supplement_4)</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved. 2019</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1598,27845,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200$$EView_record_in_Oxford_University_Press$$FView_record_in_$$GOxford_University_Press</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>de la Torre, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliver, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torres, X</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bertran, M J</creatorcontrib><title>A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination</title><title>European journal of public health</title><description>Abstract
Gender discrimination (GD) has been frequently linked to mental health. The heterogeneity of GD definition has led to different assessment methodologies and variation around the analysis of GD. This can affect the study of the association between GD and health outcomes. The main goal of this systematic scoping review is the review of previous studies to operationalize the definition of the GD construct.
Three search strategies were set in Pubmed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. 1st and 2nd search strategies included studies if their main focus was either, the analysis of discrimination perception, triggers of discrimination or the analysis of GD effects and associated factors to its perception. 3rd strategy was focused on the identification of GD questionnaires. The prevalence of GD, factors and consequences associated with GD perception and forms of discrimination were the principal variables collected. Risk of bias was assessed (PROSPERO: CRD42019120719).
A total of 925 studies were obtained and 84 papers included. GD analysis environments were described. 60 questionnaires of discrimination were identified. Prevalence of GD varied between 3.4-67%. Female gender and a younger age were the factors most frequently related to GD. Poorer mental health was the most frequent consequence. Two components of the GD construct were identified: undervaluation (different recognition, opportunities in access, evaluation standards and expectations) and different treatment (verbal abuse and behavior).
GD is measured in several environments and with different methodologies. The two component definition of GD can add order and precision to the measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.
Key messages
The heterogeneity in the conception of gender discrimination has led to different ways of assessment and to a great heterogeneity around the analysis of GD perception.
This operative gender discrimination construct could add order and precision to its measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.</description><subject>Abuse</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Discrimination</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Heterogeneity</subject><subject>Mental health</subject><subject>Perception</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Rates</subject><subject>Response rates</subject><subject>Responses</subject><subject>Reviews</subject><subject>Search methods</subject><subject>Sex discrimination</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><issn>1101-1262</issn><issn>1464-360X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkM1OwzAQhC0EEqXwANwscSWtN4nt-lhV_EkVXEDiZjnOpk2hcbAdUHl6jMIDcNo5zMyOPkIugc2AqWKOg--Ham7fvmEhZzljR2QCpSizQrDX46SBQQa5yE_JWQg7xhiXi3xCHpc0HELEvYmtpcG6vu021ONni180Omr63jtjtzRukVrXhegHG6lr6Aa7Gj2t22B9u2-7VOC6c3LSmPeAF393Sl5ub55X99n66e5htVxnFjhjWSMU5pLbeiFEVaKSNUchQDTApTGywgVwxAaMUTVawwuouFCVYEZCzpQqpuRq7E3rPgYMUe_c4Lv0UudlwUBKVZTJBaPLeheCx0b3aarxBw1M_2LTIzY9YtMJW8pcjxk39P-w_wDv3XLJ</recordid><startdate>20191101</startdate><enddate>20191101</enddate><creator>de la Torre, L</creator><creator>Oliver, A</creator><creator>Torres, X</creator><creator>Bertran, M J</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191101</creationdate><title>A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination</title><author>de la Torre, L ; Oliver, A ; Torres, X ; Bertran, M J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1500-f69e275cd866b4e97d5e6616f157aa7be815eef1aa9deca531b569b60a7120993</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Abuse</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Discrimination</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Heterogeneity</topic><topic>Mental health</topic><topic>Perception</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Rates</topic><topic>Response rates</topic><topic>Responses</topic><topic>Reviews</topic><topic>Search methods</topic><topic>Sex discrimination</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>de la Torre, L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Oliver, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Torres, X</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bertran, M J</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><jtitle>European journal of public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>de la Torre, L</au><au>Oliver, A</au><au>Torres, X</au><au>Bertran, M J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination</atitle><jtitle>European journal of public health</jtitle><date>2019-11-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>Supplement_4</issue><issn>1101-1262</issn><eissn>1464-360X</eissn><abstract>Abstract
Gender discrimination (GD) has been frequently linked to mental health. The heterogeneity of GD definition has led to different assessment methodologies and variation around the analysis of GD. This can affect the study of the association between GD and health outcomes. The main goal of this systematic scoping review is the review of previous studies to operationalize the definition of the GD construct.
Three search strategies were set in Pubmed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. 1st and 2nd search strategies included studies if their main focus was either, the analysis of discrimination perception, triggers of discrimination or the analysis of GD effects and associated factors to its perception. 3rd strategy was focused on the identification of GD questionnaires. The prevalence of GD, factors and consequences associated with GD perception and forms of discrimination were the principal variables collected. Risk of bias was assessed (PROSPERO: CRD42019120719).
A total of 925 studies were obtained and 84 papers included. GD analysis environments were described. 60 questionnaires of discrimination were identified. Prevalence of GD varied between 3.4-67%. Female gender and a younger age were the factors most frequently related to GD. Poorer mental health was the most frequent consequence. Two components of the GD construct were identified: undervaluation (different recognition, opportunities in access, evaluation standards and expectations) and different treatment (verbal abuse and behavior).
GD is measured in several environments and with different methodologies. The two component definition of GD can add order and precision to the measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.
Key messages
The heterogeneity in the conception of gender discrimination has led to different ways of assessment and to a great heterogeneity around the analysis of GD perception.
This operative gender discrimination construct could add order and precision to its measurement, increase response rates and reported GD.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| identifier | ISSN: 1101-1262 |
| ispartof | European journal of public health, 2019-11, Vol.29 (Supplement_4) |
| issn | 1101-1262 1464-360X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2430177934 |
| source | Oxford Journals Open Access Collection |
| subjects | Abuse Bias Discrimination Gender Heterogeneity Mental health Perception Public health Questionnaires Rates Response rates Responses Reviews Search methods Sex discrimination Systematic review |
| title | A systematic scoping review to approach the construct of gender discrimination |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T14%3A45%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_TOX&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20systematic%20scoping%20review%20to%20approach%20the%20construct%20of%20gender%20discrimination&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20public%20health&rft.au=de%20la%20Torre,%20L&rft.date=2019-11-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=Supplement_4&rft.issn=1101-1262&rft.eissn=1464-360X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_TOX%3E2430177934%3C/proquest_TOX%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2430177934&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/eurpub/ckz187.200&rfr_iscdi=true |