Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Gender bias is preference and preferential treatment for one gender over another. This has problematic implications for women and is well documented through the gender pay gap, the lack of women in leadership positions, and the amount of unpaid care work women undertake compared with men. This review examined how gender operates in nursing prompted by an awareness that much discussion about gender is about men, and this led to curiosity about how women and transgender people are represented and what their experiences are in relation to gender. This scoping review critically evaluated the research and grey literature to present an in-depth discussion of gender power in the nursing profession, with a particular view on Aotearoa New Zealand. Methods: A scoping review was conducted. CINAHL, Scopus, Medline via EBSCO, Business Source Complete and Joanna Briggs Institute databases were searched with inclusion criteria of research from New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the United States of America with an aim to establish a possible relationship between gender, nursing and Indigenous or First Nation people. Grey literature was included from the websites of New Zealand, Canada, Australia, and the United States nursing unions and registering boards. Results: The findings highlighted four main themes of 1) touch, 2) money, 3) glass elevator and glass ceiling, and 4) gender identity and assumptions of nurses. 1) Men in nursing experience judgement from patients when required to perform touch as part of their clinical duties and this judgement may influence the area where a male nurse will work. 2) In careers where women are the majority and significantly outnumber men, gender bias exists for men to occupy more senior positions and better paid jobs. 3) Women in nursing experience a glass ceiling effect that prevents upward promotion yet men in nursing experience a glass escalator effect whereby they are more largely represented at leadership and management levels. 4) In nursing, gender bias is also present due to gender stereotypes of nursing being seen as women’s work, and men in nursing are subject to negative stereotypes. Sub-themes within ‘gender identity and assumptions of nurses’ are gender role strain, gender as active challenge to social norms, sexuality, and the need for muscle. Men in nursing are often stereotyped as homosexual or less compassionate than their female peers and report frustration at the gender-based assumptions they are faced with. Discussion: Men and women in nursing experience gender bias which operates in different ways. The research focuses on the experiences of men, leaving gaps in the literature for experiences of women, and people who are not cisgendered. Very minimal intersectionality occurred, leaving experiences of gender bias within nursing and people of colour, minority groups and religious perspectives mostly absent. The research focus of men in nursing reinforces the viewpoint that men’s experiences are more valuable than women’s, which strengthens the gender bias found in most healthcare systems. Additional research is required to include women, transgender, gender non-binary, and gender-neutral people’s struggles of gender bias within nursing and a strong focus is recommended to recognise the weight of intersectionality within such research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».