10 resultados para Gender youth work
em Universidad de Alicante
Resumo:
Background: Gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards are well established. However, little is known about how welfare state regimes influence these inequalities. Objectives: To examine the relationship between welfare state regimes and gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards in Europe, considering occupational social class. Methods: We used a sample of 27, 465 workers from 28 European countries. Dependent variables were high strain, iso-strain, and effort-reward imbalance, and the independent was gender. We calculated the prevalence and prevalence ratio separately for each welfare state regime and occupational social class, using multivariate logistic regression models. Results: More female than male managers/professionals were exposed to: high strain, iso-strain, and effort–reward imbalance in Scandinavian [adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) = 2·26; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1·87–2·75; 2·12: 1·72–2·61; 1·41: 1·15–1·74; respectively] and Continental regimes (1·43: 1·23–1·54; 1·51: 1·23–1·84; 1·40: 1·17–1·67); and to high strain and iso-strain in Anglo-Saxon (1·92: 1·40–2·63; 1·85: 1·30–2·64; respectively), Southern (1·43: 1·14–1·79; 1·60: 1·18–2·18), and Eastern regimes (1·56: 1·35–1·81; 1·53: 1·28–1·83). Conclusion: Gender inequalities in the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards were not lower in those welfare state regimes with higher levels of universal social protection policies.
Resumo:
Objectives: It is well known that sex differences in analgesic prescription are not merely the logical result of greater prevalence of pain in women, since this therapeutic variability is related to factors such as educational level or social class. This study aims to analyse the relationship between analgesic prescription and gender development in different regions of Spain. Methods: Cross-sectional study of sex-differences in analgesic prescription according to the gender development of the regions studied. Analgesic prescription, pain and demographic variables were obtained from the Spanish Health Interview Survey in 2006. Gender development was measured with the Gender Development Index (GDI). A logistic regression analysis was conducted to compare analgesic prescription by sex in regions with a GDI above or below the Spanish average. Results: Once adjusted by pain, age and social class, women were more likely to be prescribed analgesics than men, odds ratio (OR) = 1.74 (1.59-1.91), as residents in regions with a lower GDI compared with those in region with a higher GDI: ORWomen = 1.26 (1.12-1.42), ORMen = 1.30 (1.13-1.50). Women experiencing pain in regions with a lower GDI were more likely than men to be treated by a general practitioner rather than by a specialist, OR = 1.32 (1.04-1.67), irrespective of age and social class. Conclusions: Gender bias may be one of the pathways by which inequalities in analgesic treatment adversely affect women's health. Moreover, research into the adequacy of analgesic treatment and the possible medicalisation of women should consider contextual factors, such as gender development.
Resumo:
Background: in both Spain and Italy the number of immigrants has strongly increased in the last 20 years, currently representing more than the 10% of workforce in each country. The segregation of immigrants into unskilled or risky jobs brings negative consequences for their health. The objective of this study is to compare prevalence of work-related health problems between immigrants and native workers in Italy and Spain. Methods: data come from the Italian Labour Force Survey (n=65 779) and Spanish Working Conditions Survey (n=11 019), both conducted in 2007. We analyzed merged datasets to evaluate whether interviewees, both natives and migrants, judge their health being affected by their work conditions and, if so, which specific diseases. For migrants, we considered those coming from countries with a value of the Human Development Index lower than 0.85. Logistic regression models were used, including gender, age, and education as adjusting factors. Results: migrants reported skin diseases (Mantel-Haenszel pooled OR=1.49; 95%CI: 0.59-3.74) and musculoskeletal problems among those employed in agricultural sector (Mantel-Haenszel pooled OR=1.16; 95%CI: 0.69-1.96) more frequently than natives; country-specific analysis showed higher risks of musculoskeletal problems among migrants compared to the non-migrant population in Italy (OR=1.17; 95% CI: 0.48-1.59) and of respiratory problems in Spain (OR=2.02; 95%CI: 1.02-4.0). In both countries the risk of psychological stress was predominant among national workers. Conclusions: this collaborative study allows to strength the evidence concerning the health of migrant workers in Southern European countries.
Resumo:
Introduction: Gender inequalities exist in work life, but little is known about their presence in relation to factors examined in occupation health settings. The aim of this study was to identify and summarize the working and employment conditions described as determinants of gender inequalities in occupational health in studies related to occupational health published between 1999 and 2010. Methods: A systematic literature review was undertaken of studies available in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Sociological Abstracts, LILACS, EconLit and CINAHL between 1999 and 2010. Epidemiologic studies were selected by applying a set of inclusion criteria to the title, abstract, and complete text. The quality of the studies was also assessed. Selected studies were qualitatively analysed, resulting in a compilation of all differences between women and men in the prevalence of exposure to working and employment conditions and work-related health problems as outcomes. Results: Most of the 30 studies included were conducted in Europe (n=19) and had a cross-sectional design (n=24). The most common topic analysed was related to the exposure to work-related psychosocial hazards (n=8). Employed women had more job insecurity, lower control, worse contractual working conditions and poorer self-perceived physical and mental health than men did. Conversely, employed men had a higher degree of physically demanding work, lower support, higher levels of effort-reward imbalance, higher job status, were more exposed to noise and worked longer hours than women did. Conclusions: This systematic review has identified a set of working and employment conditions as determinants of gender inequalities in occupational health from the occupational health literature. These results may be useful to policy makers seeking to reduce gender inequalities in occupational health, and to researchers wishing to analyse these determinants in greater depth.
Resumo:
Sex and gender differences influence the health and wellbeing of men and women. Although studies have drawn attention to observed differences between women and men across diseases, remarkably little research has been pursued to systematically investigate these underlying sex differences. Women continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and even in studies in which both men and women participate, systematic analysis of data to identify potential sex-based differences is lacking. Standards for reporting of clinical trials have been established to ensure provision of complete, transparent and critical information. An important step in addressing the gender imbalance would be inclusion of a gender perspective in the next Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline revision. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, as a set of well-recognized and widely used guidelines for authors and biomedical journals, should similarly emphasize the ethical obligation of authors to present data analyzed by gender as a matter of routine. Journal editors are also promoters of ethical research and adequate standards of reporting, and requirements for inclusion of gender analyses should be integrated into editorial policies as a matter of urgency.
Resumo:
Background: It has been shown that gender equity has a positive impact on the everyday activities of people (decision making, income allocation, application and observance of norms/rules) which affect their health. Gender equity is also a crucial determinant of health inequalities at national level; thus, monitoring is important for surveillance of women’s and men’s health as well as for future health policy initiatives. The Gender Equity Index (GEI) was designed to show inequity solely towards women. Given that the value under scrutiny is equity, in this paper a modified version of the GEI is proposed, the MGEI, which highlights the inequities affecting both sexes. Methods: Rather than calculating gender gaps by means of a quotient of proportions, gaps in the MGEI are expressed in absolute terms (differences in proportions). The Spearman’s rank coefficient, calculated from country rankings obtained according to both indexes, was used to evaluate the level of concordance between both classifications. To compare the degree of sensitivity and obtain the inequity by the two methods, the variation coefficient of the GEI and MGEI values was calculated. Results: Country rankings according to GEI and MGEI values showed a high correlation (rank coef. = 0.95). The MGEI presented greater dispersion (43.8%) than the GEI (19.27%). Inequity towards men was identified in the education gap (rank coef. = 0.36) when using the MGEI. According to this method, many countries shared the same absolute value for education but with opposite signs, for example Azerbaijan (−0.022) and Belgium (0.022), reflecting inequity towards women and men, respectively. This also occurred in the empowerment gap with the technical and professional job component (Brunei:-0.120 vs. Australia, Canada Iceland and the U.S.A.: 0.120). Conclusion: The MGEI identifies and highlights the different areas of inequities between gender groups. It thus overcomes the shortcomings of the GEI related to the aim for which this latter was created, namely measuring gender equity, and is therefore of great use to policy makers who wish to understand and monitor the results of specific equity policies and to determine the length of time for which these policies should be maintained in order to correct long-standing structural discrimination against women.
Resumo:
Evolución de la desigualdad por género del empleo turístico en España. Si bien la inversión en capital laboral femenino en la industria turística ha aumentado en los últimos años y parece que la discriminación en el acceso a puestos directivos ha descendido, se siguen produciendo diferentes situaciones de desigualdad. La mujer mantiene un salario por debajo del hombre y han aparecido nuevas formas de segregación ocupacional entre hombres y mujeres e incluso entre las propias mujeres: la división entre trabajo a tiempo parcial y completo es un buen ejemplo de este proceso. La hipótesis que se plantea este trabajo es que esa combinación entre tiempo de trabajo remunerado (ámbito público) y no remunerado (ámbito privado, doméstico) es un obstáculo que provoca el acceso de los varones a empleos hasta ahora "femeninos"; así mismo, se observará la calidad del empleo turístico desde la perspectiva de género.
Resumo:
The present study examined the predictive effects of gender, intellectual ability, self-concept, motivation, learning strategies, popularity and parent involvement on academic achievement. Hiearchical regression analysis were performed with six steps in which each variable was included, among a sample of 1398 high school students (mean age = 12.5; standard deviation = .67) of eight education centers from the province of Alicante (Spain). The results revealed significant predictive effects of all of the variables, explaining 59.1% of the total variance.
Resumo:
In short, what Elisa Chilet has found in her recent thesis dissertation entitled 'Gender bias in clinical research, pharmaceutical marketing and the prescription of drugs', a review of which is published in this issue of the journal, is a significant amount of gender bias.
Resumo:
The risk of disease, disability, and mortality as well as access to health services are unfairly distributed among the population, with certain groups bearing an unequally larger burden of ill health and poorer access to care due to gender, sexual identity/orientation, ethnic background, or class. According to the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), these health inequalities emanate from socioeconomic and political factors (governance, cultural values, macroeconomic policies), which generate a set of socioeconomic positions in society according to which populations are stratified based on gender, ethnicity, education, income, or other factors. These societal inequalities influence people’s material and psychosocial circumstances as well as behavioral and biological factors, which in turn impact on health inequalities. Tackling gender, race/ethnic, and socioeconomic inequalities in society is thus recognized as the most powerful action to cope with unequal health risks distribution, and social innovations focusing on these ‘root causes’ are needed in order to prevent and stop endemic social inequalities and social exclusion in health within low-income as well as high-income countries. Increasing existing knowledge and making visible the health status of the most vulnerable and invisible groups are critical in order to contribute to this imperative challenge.