Dataset Information

Disrupting gender norms in health systems: making the case for change.

ABSTRACT: Restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities are replicated and reinforced in health systems, contributing to gender inequalities in health. In this Series paper, we explore how to address all three through recognition and then with disruptive solutions. We used intersectional feminist theory to guide our systematic reviews, qualitative case studies based on lived experiences, and quantitative analyses based on cross-sectional and evaluation research. We found that health systems reinforce patients' traditional gender roles and neglect gender inequalities in health, health system models and clinic-based programmes are rarely gender responsive, and women have less authority as health workers than men and are often devalued and abused. With regard to potential for disruption, we found that gender equality policies are associated with greater representation of female physicians, which in turn is associated with better health outcomes, but that gender parity is insufficient to achieve gender equality. We found that institutional support and respect of nurses improves quality of care, and that women's empowerment collectives can increase health-care access and provider responsiveness. We see promise from social movements in supporting women's reproductive rights and policies. Our findings suggest we must view gender as a fundamental factor that predetermines and shapes health systems and outcomes. Without addressing the role of restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities within and outside health systems, we will not reach our collective ambitions of universal health coverage and the Sustainable Development Goals. We propose action to systematically identify and address restrictive gender norms and gender inequalities in health systems.

SUBMITTER: Hay K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7233290 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The key to high impact health services is institutionalizing and sustaining programme evaluation. Uganda represents a success story in the use of a specific programme evaluation method: Lot Quality Assurance Sampling (LQAS). Institutionalization is defined by two C's: competent programme evaluators and control mechanisms that effectively use evaluation data to improve health services. Sustainability means continued training and funding for the evaluation approach. Social science literature that researches institutionalization has emphasized 'stability', whereas in global health, the issue is determining how to improve the impact of services by 'changing' programmes. In Uganda, we measured the extent of the institutionalization and sustainability of evaluating programmes that produce change in nine districts sampled to represent three largely rural regions and varying levels of effective health programmes. We used the proportion of mothers with children aged 0-11?months who delivered in a health facility as the principal indicator to measure programme effectiveness. Interviews and focus groups were conducted among directors, evaluation supervisors, data collectors in the district health offices, and informant interviews conducted individually at the central government level. Seven of the nine districts demonstrated a high level of institutionalization of evaluation. The two others had only conducted one round of programme evaluation. When we control for the availability of health facilities, we find that the degree of institutionalization is moderately related to the prevalence of the delivery of a baby in a health facility. Evaluation was institutionalized at the central government level. Sustainability existed at both levels. Several measures indicate that lessons from the nine district case studies may be relevant to the 74 districts that had at least two rounds of programme evaluation. We note that there is an association between the evaluation data being used to change health services, and the four separate indicators being used to measure women's health and child survival services. We conclude that the two C's (competent evaluators and control mechanisms) have been critical for sustaining programme evaluation in Uganda.

Project description:BackgroundClimate change has been described as the biggest global health threat of the 21st century. Typically framed as an environmental issue, some suggest this view has contributed to public ambivalence and hence a lack of public engagement. The lack of understanding of climate change as a significant environmental health risk on the part of the lay public represents a significant barrier to behaviour change. We therefore need to think about reframing the impact of climate change from an environmental to a health issue. This paper builds on calls for increased understanding of the public's views of human health risks associated with climate change, focusing on facilitators and barriers to behaviour change.MethodsSemi-structured in-depth interviews (n = 22) with residents of the Golden Horseshoe region of Southern Ontario were conducted between August 2010 and January 2011. Topics included individual and community health, climate change, and facilitators and barriers to behaviour change.ResultsFew participants recognized the role of the environment in the context of either individual and community health. When asked about health concerns specific to their community, however, environmental issues were mentioned frequently. Health effects as possible impacts of global environmental change were mentioned by 77% of participants when prompted, but this link was not described in great detail or within the context of impacting their communities or themselves. Participants were willing to act in environmentally friendly ways, and possible incentives to undertake behaviour change such as decreasing cost were described. Health co-benefits were not identified as incentives to engaging in mitigative or adaptive behaviours.ConclusionsThe results support recent calls for reframing the impact of climate change from an environmental to a public health issue in order to increase public engagement in adaptive and mitigative behaviour change. While previous research has touched on public awareness of the human health risks of climate change, we have further explored the attitude-action link through the examination of facilitators and barriers to behaviour change.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding how gender norms affect health is an important entry point into designing programs and policies to change norms and improve gender equality and health. However, it is rare for global health datasets to include questions on gender norms, especially questions that go beyond measuring gender-related attitudes, thus limiting gender analysis.MethodsWe developed five case studies using health survey data from six countries to demonstrate approaches to defining and operationalising proxy measures and analytic approaches to investigating how gender norms can affect health. Key findings, strengths and limitations of our norms proxies and methodological choices are summarised.FindingsCase studies revealed links between gender norms and multiple adolescent health outcomes. Proxys for norms were derived from data on attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours, as well as differences between attitudes and behaviours. Data were cross-sectional, longitudinal, census- and social network-based. Analytic methods were diverse. We found that gender norms affect: 1) Intimate partner violence in Nigeria; 2) Unhealthy weight control behaviours in Brazil and South Africa; 3) HIV status in Zambia; 4) Health and social mobility in the US; and 5) Childbirth in Honduras.InterpretationResearchers can use existing global health survey data to examine pathways through which gender norms affect health by generating proxies for gender norms. While direct measures of gender norms can greatly improve the understanding of how gender affects health, proxy measures for norms can be designed for the specific health-related outcome and normative context, for instance by either aggregating behaviours or attitudes or quantifying the difference (dissonance) between them. These norm proxies enable evaluations of the influence of gender norms on health and insights into possible reference groups and sanctions for non-compliers, thus informing programmes and policies to shape norms and improve health.

Dataset Information

Disrupting gender norms in health systems: making the case for change.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets