ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine gender differences in the magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases and gender inequalities in health care in the adult population of Asturias in 2022. METHOD: A cross-sectional population study in people (>14 years) with at least one diagnosis of chronic disease (780,566 inhabitants). SOURCES OF INFORMATION: computer program for morbidity groups (Ministry of Health), Electronic medical record of primary care and hospital. Comparative analysis by sex and age, the mean values of chronic diseases and complexity index (Student's t test and one-way ANOVA), and probability (odds ratio and 95% CI) of suffering from specific chronic diseases, making one or more visits to the hospital emergency department or one or more admissions to hospital. RESULTS: 89.9% of women and 82.1% of men were registered with at least one chronic disease. The mean was higher in women (4.36) than in men (3.22) (p<0.001). Complexity index: men 4.56 and women 5.85 (p<0.001). Results show that women are more likely to attend the hospital emergency department, with an attendance rate of 50% for the diseases cited, compared with men at 29%. The rate of hospital admission is higher in men in 13 of the 14 diseases studied (85%). CONCLUSIONS: Gender analysis can also be applied to secondary sources of the National Health System. Despite the greater magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases in women, there is a higher frequency of hospital admissions in men compared to women with the same diseases. This implies an unequal care profile in the field of hospital admissions that the scientific literature associates with gender biases in health care.
Subject(s)
Delivery of Health Care , Hospitalization , Male , Adult , Humans , Female , Cross-Sectional Studies , Chronic Disease , MorbidityABSTRACT
Objetivo: Determinar las diferencias según sexo de la magnitud y la complejidad por enfermedades crónicas, y las desigualdades de género, en la atención sanitaria de la población adulta en Asturias en el año 2022. Método: Estudio transversal poblacional en mayores de 14 años con al menos un diagnóstico de enfermedad crónica (780.566 habitantes). Fuentes de información: programa informático de grupos de morbilidad (Ministerio de Sanidad), Historia clínica electrónica de atención primaria y hospitalaria. Análisis comparativo por sexo y edad: medias de patologías crónicas e índice de complejidad (t de Student y ANOVA de un factor), y probabilidad (odds ratio e intervalo de confianza del 95%) de padecer enfermedades crónicas específicas, realizar una o más visitas a urgencias, e ingresos hospitalarios. Resultados: En atención primaria se registraron un 89,9% de mujeres y un 82,1% de hombres con al menos una enfermedad crónica. La media fue mayor en las mujeres (4,36) que en los hombres (3,22) (p < 0,001). Índice de complejidad: hombres 4,56 y mujeres 5,85 (p < 0,001). Mientras que la probabilidad de acudir a urgencias es superior en las mujeres en el 50% de las patologías (hombres 29%), la probabilidad de ingresar es superior en los hombres en 13 de las 14 patologías estudiadas (85%). Conclusiones: El análisis de género también se puede aplicar en fuentes secundarias del Sistema Nacional de Salud. Pese a la mayor magnitud y complejidad en las mujeres, la mayor frecuencia de hospitalizaciones en los hombres que en las mujeres con las mismas patologías supone un perfil de atención desigual en el ámbito de ingresos hospitalarios que la literatura científica relaciona con sesgos de género en la atención sanitaria.(AU)
Objective: To determine gender differences in the magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases and gender inequalities in health care in the adult population of Asturias in 2022. Method: A cross-sectional population study in people (>14 years) with at least one diagnosis of chronic disease (780,566 inhabitants). Sources of information: computer program for morbidity groups (Ministry of Health), Electronic medical record of primary care and hospital. Comparative analysis by sex and age, the mean values of chronic diseases and complexity index (Student's t test and one-way ANOVA), and probability (odds ratio and 95% CI) of suffering from specific chronic diseases, making one or more visits to the hospital emergency department or one or more admissions to hospital. Results: 89.9% of women and 82.1% of men were registered with at least one chronic disease. The mean was higher in women (4.36) than in men (3.22) (p < 0.001). Complexity index: men 4.56 and women 5.85 (p < 0.001). Results show that women are more likely to attend the hospital emergency department, with an attendance rate of 50% for the diseases cited, compared with men at 29%. The rate of hospital admission is higher in men in 13 of the 14 diseases studied (85%). Conclusions: Gender analysis can also be applied to secondary sources of the National Health System. Despite the greater magnitude and complexity of chronic diseases in women, there is a higher frequency of hospital admissions in men compared to women with the same diseases. This implies an unequal care profile in the field of hospital admissions that the scientific literature associates with gender biases in health care.(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Young Adult , Adult , Middle Aged , 57444 , Chronic Disease/nursing , Gender Perspective , Morbidity , 50230 , Sexism , Cross-Sectional Studies , SpainABSTRACT
Analisou-se a participação da Psicologia no Sistema Nacional de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação (SNCTI), situando-a entre as Grandes áreas do conhecimento. Para tanto, tomou-se como referência o panorama atual de distribuição das bolsas de produtividade em pesquisa (PQ) no Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). Ademais, apresentou-se a distribuição das bolsas PQ por modalidade e sexo a fim de discutir as desigualdades de gênero, seja no âmbito geral da Ciência, seja internamente à Psicologia. Metodologicamente, trabalhou-se a partir do banco de pesquisadoras(es) ativas(os) disponibilizado pelo CNPq em 2019, constituído por 12.917 bolsistas PQ, incluindo todas as áreas. Observou-se a existência de desigualdades entre as grandes áreas do conhecimento no acesso aos recursos de fomento à pesquisa, particularmente no que tange à distribuição de cotas PQ. Há também desigualdades regionais e assimetrias de gênero na carreira acadêmica e de pesquisa entre homens e mulheres refletidas no quantitativo e na modalidade de bolsa PQ em todas as áreas do conhecimento e na Psicologia, em particular. A Psicologia, no conjunto de cotas disponibilizadas pelo CNPq, ao longo dos seus 60 anos de existência, detém ainda percentual pouco expressivo. Considera-se que, em alguma medida, esse cenário tem relação com o fato de a área ser historicamente marcada como profissão predominantemente feminina, como disciplina aplicada e com pouca tradição no campo científico e de produção de conhecimento.(AU)
This study analyzes the participation of Psychology in the National System of Science, Technology and Innovation (SNCTI), placing it among the major areas of knowledge. For this purpose, it took the current panorama of research productivity fellowship (PQ) distribution at the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) as reference. It presents the distribution of PQ grants by modality and gender to discuss gender inequalities, both in the general sphere of science and within Psychology. Data was collected from the bank of active researcher(s) made available by CNPq in 2019, consisting of 12,917 PQ fellows, including all areas. All major areas of knowledge showed inequalities in access to resources for research promotion, particularly in terms of PQ quota distribution. The results also point to regional inequalities and gender asymmetries in the academic and research career reflected in the quantity and modality of the FP grant in all areas of knowledge, especially Psychology. In the set of quotas made available by CNPq, Psychology, throughout its 60 years of existence, still holds an insignificant percentage. To some extent, this scenario stems from the fact that Psychology is historically marked as a predominantly female profession, as an applied discipline and with little tradition in the scientific field and knowledge production.(AU)
Se analizó la participación de la Psicología en el Sistema Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación (SNCTI), ubicándola entre las principales áreas del conocimiento. Para ello, se tomó como referencia el panorama actual de distribución de las becas de productividad en investigación (PQ) en el Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (CNPq). Además, se buscó presentar la distribución de las becas PQ por modalidad y sexo para discutir las desigualdades de género, tanto en el ámbito general de la ciencia como dentro de la Psicología. Metodológicamente, se trabajó con base en el banco de investigadoras(es) activas(os) puesto a disposición por el CNPq en 2019, compuesto por 12.917 becarios PQ, incluyendo todas las áreas. Se observó la existencia de desigualdades entre las grandes áreas de conocimiento en el acceso a los recursos para el fomento de la investigación, especialmente en lo que se refiere a la distribución de cuotas de investigación. También existen desigualdades regionales y asimetrías de género en la carrera académica entre hombres y mujeres que se reflejan en la cantidad y modalidad de la beca PQ en todas las áreas de conocimiento y, en particular, en Psicología. En el conjunto de las cuotas puestas a disposición por el CNPq, a lo largo de los 60 años de existencia de la psicología como profesión se sigue teniendo un porcentaje poco expresivo. Se considera que, en cierta medida, este escenario está relacionado con el hecho de que el área está marcada históricamente como una profesión predominantemente femenina, como una disciplina aplicada y con poca tradición en el campo científico y de producción de conocimiento.(AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Psychology , Research , Science, Technology and Society , Sex , Social Sciences , Universities , Women , Work , Knowledge , Database , Cultural Characteristics , Growth and Development , National Science, Technology and Innovation Policy , Scientific Research and Technological Development , Job Market , Information Technology , Fellowships and Scholarships , Government Programs , HumanitiesABSTRACT
Os programas de transferência de renda condicionada têm como público-alvo famílias em situação de vulnerabilidade e são pagos preferivelmente às mulheres. A crítica feminista em relação a tais programas argumenta que, ao se direcionarem os benefícios às mulheres, papéis sociais baseados na divisão sexual do trabalho são reforçados, o que gera uma sobrecarga feminina com o trabalho doméstico e do cuidado. Este artigo investiga a relação entre a titularidade feminina e o uso do tempo com o trabalho do cuidado, comparando mulheres e homens que recebem e que não recebem o benefício do Programa Bolsa Família. Para isso, foram analisados os dados disponíveis na Pesquisa Nacional por Amostra de Domicílios Contínua de 2019. Os resultados mostram que as mulheres beneficiárias que cuidam de crianças de até cinco anos despendem mais horas do que todos os outros grupos. Contudo, os homens beneficiários que cuidam de crianças nessa faixa etária gastam menos horas do que os beneficiários que não cuidam.
Conditional cash transfer programs target vulnerable families and are preferentially paid to women. Feminist criticism regarding such programs argues that directing financial transfers to women reinforces social roles based on the Sexual Division of Labor, which places a burden on women regarding domestic and care work. This paper investigates the relationship between female ownership and the time spent doing care work, comparing women and men who receive and not receive benefits from Bolsa Família Program. To do so, available data from Continuous - PNAD from 2019 were analyzed. The results show that female beneficiaries who care for children up to 5 years old spend more hours doing domestic work than all other groups. However, male beneficiaries who care for children in this age group spend less hours in those activities than beneficiaries who do not.
Los programas de transferencia de renta condicional tienen como público objetivo familias en situación de vulnerabilidad y dan preferencia a la titularidad femenina. La crítica feminista en relación con tales programas argumenta que, al direccionar los beneficios hacia las mujeres, los roles sociales basados en la división sexual del trabajo se refuerzan, lo cual genera una sobrecarga femenina en relación con el trabajo doméstico y de cuidado. Este artículo investiga la relación entre la titularidad femenina y el uso del tiempo en el trabajo de cuidado, comparando mujeres y hombres que reciben y que no reciben prestaciones del programa Bolsa Familia. Para esto, fueron analizados los datos disponibles en la Encuesta Nacional Anual de Muestreo Residencial. Los resultados muestran que las mujeres beneficiadas que cuidan niños de hasta cinco años gastan más horas que todos los otros grupos, aunque los hombres beneficiados que cuidan niños en este rango de edad gastan menos horas que los que no los cuidan.
Subject(s)
Humans , Women, Working , Demography , Race Factors , Government Programs , Brazil , Censuses , FeminismABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Some studies have shown a lower female participation in scientific publications. The objective of this study is to analyse the gender inequalities in the main Spanish journals of medical publications. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Cross-sectional study of the main Spanish medical journals classified by SCImago Journal & Country Ranking (n=24) and their publications (n=3.375), during the year 2017. Women/men ratio in authorship was calculated for all journals and types of papers. Bivariate analyses were developed with the type of article as the dependent variable, and gender, institution, and country of the first and last authors as the independent variables. Logistic regression models were performed to calculate adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) of the types of papers according to authorship gender, institution, and country. The statistical program used was R. RESULTS: The total number of authors was 16,252 (44.2% women, 53.9% men, and 1.9% non-identified gender). Women represented 46% of the first authors and 33.5% of the last ones. Women were the first authors of Editorials less often than men (aOR 0.39; 95% CI 0.30-0.51), but more often in Originals (aOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.33-1.80). Women were the last authors with less frequency in all types of papers, especially in Editorials (aOR 0.50; 95% CI 0.35-0.70). The women/men ratio in authorship was less than 0.80 in 10 of 26 journals analysed (41.7%). CONCLUSIONS: These results show the gender inequalities in the authorship of the main Spanish medical journals in 2017, especially as first authors and Editorials.
Subject(s)
Authorship , Periodicals as Topic/statistics & numerical data , Publishing/statistics & numerical data , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Sex Distribution , SpainABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To describe the evolution of psychological distress in the adult Spanish population in 2006, 2011 and 2017. To study the mental health status of the population in 2017 analyzing the prevalence of psychological distress, prescription of psychiatric drugs, diagnosis and self-perceived health, in Spain and in the autonomous regions, and differentiating between men and women. METHOD: Cross-sectional study, using data from the 2006, 2011 and 2017 National Health Surveys in Spain. VARIABLES: psychological distress (GHQ-12), self-perceived health, mental disorder diagnosis, prescription of psychiatric drugs, sex and autonomous community. The frequencies, percentages and confidence intervals at 95% were calculated. The statistical significance level for the chi-square test was p <0.05. RESULTS: The prevalence of psychological distress in Spain was 22.2% in 2006, 22.1% in 2011 and 19.1% in 2017. With the exception of Cantabria in 2011, in all cases the prevalence of psychological distress was higher in women than men. In 2017, most of the autonomous communities showed prevalence of diagnosis and poor self-perceived health near the Spanish average (15.4% and 33.6%, respectively). The Spanish average of tranquilizer prescription was 9.2%. The highest prevalence was found in Galicia while the lowest was found in Cantabria (overall population and men) and Ceuta and Melilla (women). The Spanish average of antidepressant prescription was 3.6%. The highest prevalence was found in Asturias (overall population and women) and in Galicia (men), while the lowest was found in Ceuta and Melilla. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological distress is a prevalent phenomenon although its prevalence in Spain has decreased slightly. There are big differences in the prescription of psychiatric drugs between each autonomous community. Women showed poorer outcomes on each mental health indicator analyzed.
