Author
Listed:
- Wen Hui Lim
- Chloe Wong
- Sneha Rajiv Jain
- Cheng Han Ng
- Chia Hui Tai
- M Kamala Devi
- Dujeepa D Samarasekera
- Shridhar Ganpathi Iyer
- Choon Seng Chong
Abstract
Objective: This study was conducted to better understand the pervasive gender barriers obstructing the progression of women in surgery by synthesising the perspectives of both female surgical trainees and surgeons. Methods: Five electronic databases, including Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched for relevant articles. Following a full-text review by three authors, qualitative data was synthesized thematically according to the Thomas and Harden methodology and quality assessment was conducted by two authors reaching a consensus. Results: Fourteen articles were included, with unfavorable work environments, male-dominated culture and societal pressures being major themes. Females in surgery lacked support, faced harassment, and had unequal opportunities, which were often exacerbated by sex-blindness by their male counterparts. Mothers were especially affected, struggling to achieve a work-life balance while facing strong criticism. However, with increasing recognition of the unique professional traits of female surgeons, there is progress towards gender quality which requires continued and sustained efforts. Conclusion: This systematic review sheds light on the numerous gender barriers that continue to stand in the way of female surgeons despite progress towards gender equality over the years. As the global agenda towards equality progresses, this review serves as a call-to-action to increase collective effort towards gender inclusivity which will significantly improve future health outcomes.
Suggested Citation
Wen Hui Lim & Chloe Wong & Sneha Rajiv Jain & Cheng Han Ng & Chia Hui Tai & M Kamala Devi & Dujeepa D Samarasekera & Shridhar Ganpathi Iyer & Choon Seng Chong, 2021.
"The unspoken reality of gender bias in surgery: A qualitative systematic review,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-18, February.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0246420
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246420
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0246420. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.