BackgroundThere is a lack of research about the experiences of participating in weight-reducing interventions. The aim of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators to weight-loss experienced by participants in a diet intervention for middle-aged to older women in the general population in Northern Sweden.MethodIn the intervention the women were randomised to eat either a Palaeolithic-type diet or a diet according to Nordic Nutrition recommendations for 24 months. A strategic selection was made of women from the two intervention groups as well as from the drop-outs in relation to social class, civil status and age. Thematic structured interviews were performed with twelve women and analysed with qualitative content analyses.ResultsThe results showed that the women in the dietary intervention experienced two main barriers – struggling with self (related to difficulties in changing food habits, health problems, lack of self-control and insecurity) and struggling with implementing the diet (related to social relations and project-related difficulties) – and two main facilitators– striving for self-determination (related to having clear goals) and receiving support (from family/friends as well as from the project) – for weight-loss. There was a greater emphasis on barriers than on facilitators.ConclusionIt is important to also include drop-outs from diet interventions in order to fully understand barriers to weight-loss. A gender-relational approach can bring new insights into understanding experiences of barriers to weight-loss.Trial registrationClinicalTrials gov NCT00692536.
Our findings indicate that the interdisciplinary teams in specialist healthcare may discriminate against women with chronic pain when physiotherapy and radiological investigation are recommended. The team's choice of recommendations might be influenced by gendered attitudes, but this field of research needs to be studied further.
BackgroundThere is a lack of research about a potential education-related bias in assessment of patients with chronic pain. The aim of this study was to analyze whether low-educated men and women with chronic pain were less often selected to multidisciplinary rehabilitation than those with high education.MethodsThe population consisted of consecutive patients (n = 595 women, 266 men) referred during a three-year period from mainly primary health care centers for a multidisciplinary team assessment at a pain rehabilitation clinic at a university hospital in Northern Sweden. Patient data were collected from the Swedish Quality Registry for Pain Rehabilitation National Pain Register. The outcome variable was being selected by the multidisciplinary team assessment to a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. The independent variables were: sex, age, born outside Sweden, education, pain severity as well as the hospital, anxiety and depression scale (HADS).ResultsLow-educated women were less often selected to multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs than high-educated women (OR 0.55, CI 0.30–0.98), even after control for age, being born outside Sweden, pain intensity and HADS. No significant findings were found when comparing the results between high- and low-educated men.ConclusionOur findings can be interpreted as possible discrimination against low-educated women with chronic pain in hospital referrals to pain rehabilitation. There is a need for more gender-theoretical research emphasizing the importance of taking several power dimensions into account when analyzing possible bias in health care.
IntroductionThe concepts of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ are both of vital importance in medicine and health sciences. However, the meaning of these concepts has seldom been discussed in the medical literature. The aim of this study was to explore what the concepts of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ meant for gender researchers based in a medical faculty.MethodsSixteen researchers took part in focus group discussions. The analysis was performed in several steps. The participating researchers read the text and discussed ideas for analysis in national and international workshops. The data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. The authors performed independent preliminary analyses, which were further developed and intensively discussed between the authors.ResultsThe analysis of meanings of the concepts of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ for gender researchers based in a medical faculty resulted in three categories; “Sex as more than biology”, with the subcategories ‘sex’ is not simply biological, ‘sex’ as classification, and ‘sex’ as fluid and changeable; ”Gender as a multiplicity of power-related constructions”, with the subcategories: ‘gender’ as constructions, ‘gender’ power dimensions, and ‘gender’ as doing femininities and masculinities; “Sex and gender as interwoven”, with the subcategories: ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ as inseparable and embodying ‘sex’ and ‘gender’.ConclusionsGender researchers within medicine pointed out the importance of looking beyond a dichotomous view of the concepts of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. The perception of the concepts was that ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ were intertwined. Further research is needed to explore how ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ interact.
We explored the difficulties that gender researchers encounter in their research and the strategies they use for solving these problems. Sixteen Swedish researchers, all women, took part in focus group discussions; the data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The problems reported fell into four main categories: the ambiguity of the concepts of sex and gender; traps associated with dichotomization; difficulties with communication; and issues around publication. Categories of suggested problem-solving strategies were adaptation, pragmatism, addressing the complexities, and definition of terms. Here the specific views of gender researchers in medicine and health sciences-"medical insiders"-bring new challenges into focus.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.