Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLópez Alcalde, Jesús 
dc.contributor.authorStallings, Elena
dc.contributor.authorCabir Nunes, Sheila
dc.contributor.authorFernández Chavez, Abelardo
dc.contributor.authorDaheron, Mathilde
dc.contributor.authorBonfill Cosp, Xavier
dc.contributor.authorZamora, Javier
dc.date.accessioned2019-07-29T09:08:31Z
dc.date.available2019-07-29T09:08:31Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.issn1472-6963spa
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10641/1663
dc.description.abstractBackground: Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are common and increase morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Their control continues to be an unresolved issue worldwide. HAIs epidemiology shows sex/gender differences. Thus the lack of consideration of sex/gender in Cochrane reviews will limit their applicability and capacity to support informed decisions. This study aims to describe the extent to which Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs consider sex and gender. Methods: Methodology study appraising Cochrane reviews of interventions to prevent HAIs. Search methods: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1995 (launch of the journal) to 31 December 2016. Two authors independently extracted data with EPPI-Reviewer 4 software, and independently appraised the sex/gender content of the reviews with the Sex and Gender Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews (SGAT-SR). Results: This study included 113 reviews assessing the effects of interventions for preventing HAIs. 100 reviews (88%) used at least one sex or gender-related term. The terminology used was heterogeneous, being “sex” the term used in more reviews (51%). No review defined neither sex nor gender. Thus we could not assess the definitions provided. Consideration of sex and gender was practically absent in the included reviews; in fact, no review met all the applicable items of the SGAT-SR, and 51 reviews (50%) fulfilled no item. No review provided a complete description of the sex and the gender of the samples of the included studies. Only ten reviews (10%) planned to perform sex- and gender-based analysis and only three (3%) could complete the analysis. The method chosen was always the subgroup analysis based on sex (one review) or gender (two reviews). Three reviews (3%) considered sex or gender-related findings in the conclusions. Conclusion: Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs was practically absent. This lack of attention to sex and gender reduces the quality of Cochrane reviews, and their applicability for all people: women and men, boys and girls, and people of diverse gender identities. Cochrane should attempt to address the shortfalls detected.spa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherBMC Health Services Researchspa
dc.rightsAtribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/es/*
dc.subjectSystematic reviewsspa
dc.subjectData extractionspa
dc.subjectSex/genderspa
dc.subjectGender biasspa
dc.subjectHealthcareassociated infectionspa
dc.titleConsideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study.spa
dc.typearticlespa
dc.description.versionpost-printspa
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessspa
dc.description.extent1201 KBspa
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12913-019-4001-9spa


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView
2019-Lopez-Alcalde-Sex gender ...1.172MbPDFView/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 3.0 España