The training needs for gender-sensitive care in a pediatric rehabilitation hospital: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gender is an important social determinant of health; however, clinicians often lack training in how to provide gender-sensitive care. Offering appropriate and relevant training could help to address some gender-based health inequalities. Our objective was to identify and describe the training needs for gender-sensitive care among pediatric rehabilitation healthcare providers. METHODS: This study used an interpretive descriptive qualitative design to conduct interviews with 23 pediatric rehabilitation healthcare providers (19 women, 3 men, 1 transgender man), from a pediatric rehabilitation hospital in a large urban center, in Ontario, Canada from a range of disciplines. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using an open-coding inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Our analysis revealed the following themes: [1] lack of knowledge about gender-sensitive care and the need for more training; [2] content of the desired training (i.e., gender differences, effective communication and how to practice gender-sensitive care) and [3] delivery method of the training. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced gender-sensitive training for healthcare providers is required for optimizing patient outcomes and addressing gender-based health inequalities. Educators in pediatric rehabilitation should consider developing gender-sensitive care training that is embedded within post-graduate education and also continuing education within hospitals and community care centers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".