Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.
<h4>Background</h4>Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted i...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2020-01-01
|
Series: | PLoS ONE |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240371 |
id |
doaj-217ab6dcfe5f479e9ecdd47dbe9f64ad |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-217ab6dcfe5f479e9ecdd47dbe9f64ad2021-03-04T11:11:08ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032020-01-011510e024037110.1371/journal.pone.0240371Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.Évèhouénou Lionel AdissoHervé Tchala Vignon ZomahounAmédé GogovorFrance Légaré<h4>Background</h4>Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted interventions, improve evidence quality and redress health inequities. A first step is correct use of terms. We therefore assessed sex and gender terminology in SDM intervention studies.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We performed a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review of SDM interventions. We extracted study characteristics and their use of sex, gender or related terms (mention; number of categories). We assessed correct use of sex and gender terms using three criteria: "non-binary use", "use of appropriate categories" and "non-interchangeable use of sex and gender". We computed the proportion of studies that met all, any or no criteria, and explored associations between criteria met and study characteristics.<h4>Results</h4>Of 87 included studies, 58 (66.7%) mentioned sex and/or gender. The most mentioned related terms were "female" (60.9%) and "male" (59.8%). Of the 58 studies, authors used sex and gender as binary variables respectively in 36 (62%) and in 34 (58.6%) studies. No study met the criterion "non-binary use". Authors used appropriate categories to describe sex and gender respectively in 28 (48.3%) and in 8 (13.8%) studies. Of the 83 (95.4%) studies in which sex and/or gender, and/or related terms were mentioned, authors used sex and gender non-interchangeably in 16 (19.3%). No study met all three criteria. Criteria met did not vary according to study characteristics (p>.05).<h4>Conclusions</h4>In SDM implementation studies, sex and gender terms and concepts are in a state of confusion. Our results suggest the urgency of adopting a standardized use of sex and gender terms and concepts before these considerations can be properly integrated into implementation research.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240371 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun Amédé Gogovor France Légaré |
spellingShingle |
Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun Amédé Gogovor France Légaré Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. PLoS ONE |
author_facet |
Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun Amédé Gogovor France Légaré |
author_sort |
Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso |
title |
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. |
title_short |
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. |
title_full |
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. |
title_fullStr |
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. |
title_full_unstemmed |
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review. |
title_sort |
sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: a secondary analysis of a cochrane systematic review. |
publisher |
Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
series |
PLoS ONE |
issn |
1932-6203 |
publishDate |
2020-01-01 |
description |
<h4>Background</h4>Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted interventions, improve evidence quality and redress health inequities. A first step is correct use of terms. We therefore assessed sex and gender terminology in SDM intervention studies.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>We performed a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review of SDM interventions. We extracted study characteristics and their use of sex, gender or related terms (mention; number of categories). We assessed correct use of sex and gender terms using three criteria: "non-binary use", "use of appropriate categories" and "non-interchangeable use of sex and gender". We computed the proportion of studies that met all, any or no criteria, and explored associations between criteria met and study characteristics.<h4>Results</h4>Of 87 included studies, 58 (66.7%) mentioned sex and/or gender. The most mentioned related terms were "female" (60.9%) and "male" (59.8%). Of the 58 studies, authors used sex and gender as binary variables respectively in 36 (62%) and in 34 (58.6%) studies. No study met the criterion "non-binary use". Authors used appropriate categories to describe sex and gender respectively in 28 (48.3%) and in 8 (13.8%) studies. Of the 83 (95.4%) studies in which sex and/or gender, and/or related terms were mentioned, authors used sex and gender non-interchangeably in 16 (19.3%). No study met all three criteria. Criteria met did not vary according to study characteristics (p>.05).<h4>Conclusions</h4>In SDM implementation studies, sex and gender terms and concepts are in a state of confusion. Our results suggest the urgency of adopting a standardized use of sex and gender terms and concepts before these considerations can be properly integrated into implementation research. |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240371 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT evehouenoulioneladisso sexandgenderconsiderationsinimplementationinterventionstopromoteshareddecisionmakingasecondaryanalysisofacochranesystematicreview AT hervetchalavignonzomahoun sexandgenderconsiderationsinimplementationinterventionstopromoteshareddecisionmakingasecondaryanalysisofacochranesystematicreview AT amedegogovor sexandgenderconsiderationsinimplementationinterventionstopromoteshareddecisionmakingasecondaryanalysisofacochranesystematicreview AT francelegare sexandgenderconsiderationsinimplementationinterventionstopromoteshareddecisionmakingasecondaryanalysisofacochranesystematicreview |
_version_ |
1714804609314193408 |