Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

ReviewA tool for distinguishing gender research

from gender difference research- examples from work-related healthAuthor: A. Hammarström

ByProf. Dr. Monique H.W. Frings-Dresen, PhD

Full Professor

Coronel Institute of Occupational HealthAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam

The Netherlands

E-mail: m.frings@amc.uva.nl

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Comment:

• Topic sex/gender differences in occupational health is relevant since:– high prevalence of work-related diseases like

MSD, mental disorders, dermal and toxicology diseases

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Prevalence of musculoskeletal diseases: (Paoli et al., 2001)

• Upper extremity diseases: – The Netherlands: 23,4%; other European countries:

22,8%

• Low back– The Netherlands: 25,5%; other European countries:

33,2%

• Lower extremity diseases: – The Netherlands: 6,4%; other European countries: 11,5%

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Examples of jobs with work-related health problems

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Risk factors for Musculoskeletal upper extremity

diseases• Physical:

– Posture– Repetitive movement– Vibration– Force

• Non-physical:– Too little recovery time– High psychological demands– Low social support

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Adjusting working heights in construction work for scaffolders

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Conclusion:

• Focus on occupational health and medicine is relevant

• Sex/gender topics in occupational health are (until now) scarce

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Review Hammarström

• Three aims:– 1. identify possible problems and/or challenges

with regard to the concepts of sex and gender in work-related health

– 2. to propose a tool to implement the theoretical insights

– 3. the tool will be used to distinguish gender research from gender or sex difference research

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Comments

• Methods used in relation to the aims are not clear and transparent described

• Relevance and relation with work-related health?

• Unemployment and the number of articles related to unemployment are used as outcome measure and not the work-related health problem itself (a choice, but why?)

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Comments

• The criteria for the proposed tool are not transparent– Based on evidence?

• The relevance of the tool– Users: researchers? Other professionals

• The impact of the tool in relation to work-related health and sex/gender differences

• Implementation of the tool?

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Implementation of the ‘Back-Happy Tap-stand’

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

In conclusion

• Focus on sex/gender research within occupational health and medicine is relevant

• Manuscript is not (yet) transparent and well structured in relation to the aims

• The relevance and impact of the tool is not clear in relation to sex/gender research and work-related health

Coronel InstituteAmCOGG

Thank you for your attention