Background: The relevance of gender as a social determinant of health and its role in the production of health inequalities is now broadly acknowledged. However, the plethora of existing approaches to capture gender, which often stem from disciplines outside of epidemiology, makes it difficult to assess their practicality and relevance for a given research purpose. We conducted a scoping review to 1) map the evidence of how gender can be operationalised in quantitative epidemiology and 2) design a tool to critically evaluate the measures identified.Methods: We identified peer-reviewed articles in electronic databases (PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO). Eligible sources described the quantitative operationalisation of the social dimension of gender. With the help of a newly developed checklist, we assessed their relevance from an analytical perspective (e.g. intersectionality) and their potential for implementation in epidemiology.Results: Gender measures principally assessed gender roles and norms, gender-based discrimination and violence, and structural gender (in)equality. Of the 344 measures included in this review, the majority lacked theoretical foundation, and tended to reinforce the binary understanding of gender through stereotypes of femininity and masculinity. Only few measures allowed for an intersectional approach and a multilevel understanding of gender mechanisms. From a practical point of view, gender measures demonstrated potential for use in varied populations and contexts.Conclusions: A range of gender measures are readily available for epidemiological research, addressing different levels and dimensions of gender as a social construct. With our theory-informed, practice-driven scoping review, we highlighted strengths and limitations of such measures and provided analytical tools for researchers interested in conducting intersectional, gender-sensitive analyses.

Multi-country studies assessing the quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) during the COVID-19 pandemic, as defined by WHO Standards, are lacking. Women who gave birth in 12 countries of the WHO European Region from March 1, 2020 - March 15, 2021 answered an online questionnaire, including 40 WHO Standard-based Quality Measures. 21,027 mothers were included in the analysis. Among those who experienced labour (N=18,063), 41·8% (26·1%- 63·5%) experienced difficulties in accessing antenatal care, 62% (12·6%-99·0%) were not allowed a companion of choice, 31·1% (16·5%-56·9%) received inadequate breastfeeding support, 34·4% (5·2%-64·8%) reported that health workers were not always using protective personal equipment, and 31·8% (17·8%-53·1%) rated the health workers’ number as “insufficient”. Episiotomy was performed in 20·1% (6·1%-66·0%) of spontaneous vaginal births and fundal pressure applied in 41·2% (11·5% -100%) of instrumental vaginal births. In addition, 23·9% women felt they were not treated with dignity (12·8%-59·8%), 12·5% (7·0%-23·4%) suffered abuse, and 2·4% (0·1%-26·2%) made informal payments. Most findings were significantly worse among women with prelabour caesarean birth (N=2,964). Multivariate analyses confirmed significant differences among countries, with Croatia, Romania, Serbia showing significant lower QMNC Indexes and Luxemburg showing a significantly higher QMNC Index than the total sample. Younger women and those with operative births also reported significantly lower QMNC Indexes. Mothers reports revealed large inequities in QMNC across countries of the WHO European Region. Quality improvement initiatives to reduce these inequities and promote evidence-based, patient-centred respectful care for all mothers and newborns during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond are urgently needed. The study was financially supported by the Institute for Maternal and Child Health IRCCS Burlo Garofolo, Trieste, Italy. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04847336

Gender-transformative health interventions that involve men and boys are gaining global reach, adaptability to specific geographical, population and epidemiological contexts, public endorsement, and conceptual sophistication. However, the ways in which masculinities are conceptualised and operationalised in theory and practice across these interventions remains unclear. The purpose of this scoping review is to map intervention studies that conceptually grapple with masculinities and analyse: a) how the concept of masculinities is adapted and operationalised in gender-transformative interventions, with respect to intervention population and context, b) what the relationship between the concept of masculinities and its wider theoretical embedding is, and c) on which levels transformation can be observed when working with ‘masculinities’.We conducted a search in APA Psych Articles, APA PsycINFO, and CINAHL via EBSCO, MedLine, PubMed, and Web of Sciences (December 2021) looking for peer-reviewed studies on gender-transformative health interventions which engaged with masculinities conceptually. There were no restrictions regarding language, publication date, or geography. Forty-two articles were included in this review. Our abductive analysis finds that ‘hegemonic masculinities’ is a central concept in almost all included studies. This shows how the concept is adaptable to a range of different intervention contexts. The review further identifies five theoretical approaches, that help operationalise masculinities on an analytical level: feminist framework, affect theory, critical pedagogy, theories of social change, and ecological approaches. Lastly, this review draws out six levels on which transformation can be observed in the intervention outcomes: relational level, symbolic level, material level, affective level, cognitive-behavioural level, and community-structural level. The discussion underlines that processes and practices of (gender) transformation also require engagement with theories of transformation more widely and advocates for theoretical pluralism. Lastly, implications for practice, including preventative, ecological and community-based care models, are drawn out.

Objective: To describe the perception of quality of maternal and newborn care (QMNC) around the time of childbirth among migrant and nonmigrant women in Europe.Methods: Women who gave birth at a health facility in 11 countries of the WHO European Region from March 2020 to July 2021 were invited to answer an online questionnaire including demographics and childbirth experience. Data were analyzed and compared for 1781 migrant and 20 653 nonmigrant women.Results: Migrant women who experienced labor perceived slightly more difficulties in attending routine antenatal visits (41.2% vs 39.4%; P = 0.001), more barriers in accessing facilities (32.9% vs 29.9%; P = 0.001), lack of timely care (14.7% vs 13.0%; P = 0.025), inadequate room comfort and equipment (9.2% vs 8.5%; P = 0.004), inadequate number of women per room (9.4% vs 8.6%; P = 0.039), being prevented from staying with their baby as they wished (7.8% vs 6.9%; P = 0.011), or suffering abuse (14.5% vs 12.7%; P = 0.022) compared with nonmigrant women. For women who had a prelabor cesarean, migrant women were more likely not to receive pain relief after birth (16.8% vs.13.5%; P = 0.039) and less likely to provide informal payment (1.8% vs 4.4%; P = 0.005) compared with nonmigrant women. Overall, the QMNC index was not significantly different for migrant compared with nonmigrant women.Conclusion: Gaps in overall QMNC were reported by both migrant and nonmigrant women, with improvements to healthcare necessary for all.

Mothers tended to be responsible for most of the (additional) caregiving and domestic tasks during the COVID-19 pandemic while simultaneously having to pursue their work duties. Increased role conflicts, parenting stress, and exhaustion predict adverse mental health. We aimed to examine how women referred to and made sense of dominant gender norms in their arrangements of pandemic daily life and how these beliefs impacted their maternal self-conception. Qualitative interviews with 17 women were analyzed through the lens of “intensive mothering” ideology and “ideal workers” norms, emphasizing notions of maternal guilt rising from a perceived mismatch between the ideal and actual maternal self-conception. We found that mothers' notions of guilt and their decreases in health link to dominant discourses on motherhood and intersect with “ideal worker” norms. As such, these norms amplify the burden of gendered health inequalities.

Introduction : Des recherches quantitatives récentes en matière de santé publique indiquent que les femmes dans le monde entier font état d’un traitement sous-optimal lors des accouchements en établissement. Les approches les plus fréquentes utilisées jusqu’à présent pour saisir ces abus, violences ou mauvais traitements n’ont pas vraiment réussi à concilier perspectives théoriques et mesures empiriques. Afin de contribuer à une prise en compte plus précise des moteurs culturels, des conditions institutionnelles, des expressions directes et des perceptions individuelles qui portent atteinte à ou préservent ce que nous définissons comme « l’intégrité à la naissance », nous développons une nouvelle approche théorique et un modèle à plusieurs niveaux. But de l’étude : Nous étayons la terminologie de l’intégrité à la naissance par des fondements théoriques, en nous référant à deux discours théoriques : la médicalisation et la théorie du risque d’une part, et la théorie de l’ embodiment et de l’intersectionnalité, d’autre part. Nous la contextualisons ensuite dans un modèle à plusieurs niveaux afin d’opérationnaliser son potentiel pour la recherche en santé publique. Résultats : Le concept et le modèle de l’« intégrité à la naissance » reconnaissent que les femmes et personnes qui accouchent subissent une multitude de violations propres au genre, qui peuvent s’exprimer à tous les niveaux (macro à micro) comme étant implicites, inhérentes, normalisées et invisibles ou explicites, intentionnelles, visibles et acceptées par la société. Grâce à une différenciation en six domaines, nous tissons une contribution théorique dans les pratiques de soins obstétriques. Conclusions : L’intégrité à la naissance, en tant qu’approche à plusieurs niveaux dont les fondements sont théoriques constitue une étape importante pour mettre en lumière ce sujet par-delà les dimensions étudiées jusqu’à présent dans la recherche quantitative en santé. Au-delà des preuves disponibles sur l’atteinte à l’intégrité à la naissance par des interactions irrespectueuses et des pratiques abusives, elle permet de faire un pas de plus vers la compréhension des violences de genre et des inégalités de santé lors de l’accouchement.