Participation of women in the health workforce in the fragile and conflict-affected countries: a scoping review
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND: The full participation of women as healthcare providers is recognized globally as critical to favorable outcomes at all levels, including the healthcare system, to achieving universal health coverage and sustainable development goals (SDGs) by 2030. However, systemic challenges, gender biases, and inequities exist for women in the global healthcare workforce. Fragile and conflict-affected states/countries (FCASs) experience additional pressures that require specific attention to overcome challenges and disparities for sustainable development. FCASs account for 42% of global deaths due to communicable, maternal, perinatal, and nutritional conditions, requiring an appropriate health workforce. Consequently, there is a need to understand the impact of gender on workforce participation, particularly women in FCASs. METHODS: This scoping review examined the extent and nature of existing literature, as well as identified factors affecting women's participation in the health workforce in FCASs. Following Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology framework, a systematic search was conducted of published literature in five health sciences databases and grey literature. Two reviewers independently screened the title and abstract, followed by a full-text review for shortlisted sources against set criteria. RESULTS: Of 4284, 34 sources were reviewed for full text, including 18 primary studies, five review papers, and 11 grey literature sources. In most FCASs, women predominate in the health workforce, concentrated in nursing and midwifery professions; medicine, and the decision-making and leadership positions, however, are occupied by men. The review identified several constraints for women, related to professional hierarchies, gendered socio-cultural norms, and security conditions. Several sources highlight the post-conflict period as a window of opportunity to break down gender biases and stereotypes, while others highlight drawbacks, including influences by consultants, donors, and non-governmental organizations. Consultants and donors focus narrowly on programs and interventions solely serving women's reproductive health rather than taking a comprehensive approach to gender mainstreaming in planning human resources during the healthcare system's restructuring. CONCLUSION: The review identified multiple challenges and constraints facing efforts to create gender equity in the health workforce of FCASs. However, without equal participation of women in the health workforce, it will be difficult for FCASs to make progress towards achieving the SDG on gender equality.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it