Interventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorTricco, Andrea C.
dc.contributor.authorParker, Amanda
dc.contributor.authorKhan, Paul A.
dc.contributor.authorNincic, Vera
dc.contributor.authorRobson, Reid
dc.contributor.authorMacDonald, Heather
dc.contributor.authorWarren, Rachel
dc.contributor.authorCleary, Olga
dc.contributor.authorZibrowski, Elaine
dc.contributor.authorBaxter, Nancy
dc.contributor.authorBurns, Karen E. A.
dc.contributor.authorCoyle, Doug
dc.contributor.authorNdjaboue, Ruth
dc.contributor.authorClark, Jocalyn P.
dc.contributor.authorLanglois, Etienne V.
dc.contributor.authorAhmed, Sofia B.
dc.contributor.authorWitteman, Holly O.
dc.contributor.authorGraham, Ian D.
dc.contributor.authorEl-Adhami, Wafa
dc.contributor.authorSkidmore, Becky
dc.contributor.authorLégaré, France
dc.contributor.authorCurran, Janet
dc.contributor.authorHawker, Gillian
dc.contributor.authorWatt, Jennifer
dc.contributor.authorBourgeault, Ivy L.
dc.contributor.authorLeigh, Jeanna P.
dc.contributor.authorLawford, Karen
dc.contributor.authorAiken, Alice
dc.contributor.authorMcCabe, Christopher
dc.contributor.authorShepperd, Sasha
dc.contributor.authorPattani, Reena
dc.contributor.authorLeon, Natalie
dc.contributor.authorLundine, Jamie
dc.contributor.authorAdisso, Évèhouénou L.
dc.contributor.authorOno, Santa
dc.contributor.authorRabeneck, Linda
dc.contributor.authorStraus, Sharon E.
dc.date.accessioned2024-04-07T00:04:54Z
dc.date.available2024-04-07T00:04:54Z
dc.date.issued2024-04-05
dc.date.updated2024-04-07T00:04:54Z
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Various studies have demonstrated gender disparities in workplace settings and the need for further intervention. This study identifies and examines evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interventions examining gender equity in workplace or volunteer settings. An additional aim was to determine whether interventions considered intersection of gender and other variables, including PROGRESS-Plus equity variables (e.g., race/ethnicity). Methods Scoping review conducted using the JBI guide. Literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, ERIC, Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, PAIS Index, Policy Index File, and the Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database from inception to May 9, 2022, with an updated search on October 17, 2022. Results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension to scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR), Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidance, Strengthening the Integration of Intersectionality Theory in Health Inequality Analysis (SIITHIA) checklist, and Guidance for Reporting Involvement of Patients and the Public (GRIPP) version 2 checklist. All employment or volunteer sectors settings were included. Included interventions were designed to promote workplace gender equity that targeted: (a) individuals, (b) organizations, or (c) systems. Any comparator was eligible. Outcomes measures included any gender equity related outcome, whether it was measuring intervention effectiveness (as defined by included studies) or implementation. Data analyses were descriptive in nature. As recommended in the JBI guide to scoping reviews, only high-level content analysis was conducted to categorize the interventions, which were reported using a previously published framework. Results We screened 8855 citations, 803 grey literature sources, and 663 full-text articles, resulting in 24 unique RCTs and one companion report that met inclusion criteria. Most studies (91.7%) failed to report how they established sex or gender. Twenty-three of 24 (95.8%) studies reported at least one PROGRESS-Plus variable: typically sex or gender or occupation. Two RCTs (8.3%) identified a non-binary gender identity. None of the RCTs reported on relationships between gender and other characteristics (e.g., disability, age, etc.). We identified 24 gender equity promoting interventions in the workplace that were evaluated and categorized into one or more of the following themes: (i) quantifying gender impacts; (ii) behavioural or systemic changes; (iii) career flexibility; (iv) increased visibility, recognition, and representation; (v) creating opportunities for development, mentorship, and sponsorship; and (vi) financial support. Of these interventions, 20/24 (83.3%) had positive conclusion statements for their primary outcomes (e.g., improved academic productivity, increased self-esteem) across heterogeneous outcomes. Conclusions There is a paucity of literature on interventions to promote workplace gender equity. While some interventions elicited positive conclusions across a variety of outcomes, standardized outcome measures considering specific contexts and cultures are required. Few PROGRESS-Plus items were reported. Non-binary gender identities and issues related to intersectionality were not adequately considered. Future research should provide consistent and contemporary definitions of gender and sex. Trial registration Open Science Framework https://osf.io/x8yae .
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medicine. 2024 Apr 05;22(1):149
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03346-7
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1880/118387
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/43229
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s)
dc.titleInterventions on gender equity in the workplace: a scoping review
dc.typeJournal Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
12916_2024_Article_3346.pdf
Size:
1.62 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.25 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Open Access Publications