Representation of Women and Women's Health in Australian Medical School Course Outlines, Curriculum Requirements, and Selected Core Clinical Textbooks.
Lea Merone, Komla Tsey, Darren Russell, Cate Nagle
{"title":"Representation of Women and Women's Health in Australian Medical School Course Outlines, Curriculum Requirements, and Selected Core Clinical Textbooks.","authors":"Lea Merone, Komla Tsey, Darren Russell, Cate Nagle","doi":"10.1089/whr.2023.0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Historically, medical research has, outside of reproductive health, neglected the health needs of women. Medical studies have previously excluded female participants, meaning research data have been collected from males and generalized to females. Knowledge gained from research is translated to clinical education and patient care, and female exclusion may result in gaps in the medical school curricula and textbooks.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study involved a desktop review of the <i>Australian Medical Council Standards for assessment and accreditation of primary medical programs,</i> the online publicly available Australian medical school course outlines, and finally, an analysis of the recommended textbooks.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There is no fixed or explicit requirement to include women's health in Australian medical school curricula. Medical school course outlines do not adequately include women's health; similarly, clinical medicine textbooks do not account for sex and gender differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Important sex and gender differences in medicine are not reflected adequately in the medical school course outlines, curricula, or clinical textbooks. This may have significant consequences on women's health.</p>","PeriodicalId":75329,"journal":{"name":"Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","volume":"5 1","pages":"276-285"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11002328/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/whr.2023.0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Historically, medical research has, outside of reproductive health, neglected the health needs of women. Medical studies have previously excluded female participants, meaning research data have been collected from males and generalized to females. Knowledge gained from research is translated to clinical education and patient care, and female exclusion may result in gaps in the medical school curricula and textbooks.
Materials and methods: This study involved a desktop review of the Australian Medical Council Standards for assessment and accreditation of primary medical programs, the online publicly available Australian medical school course outlines, and finally, an analysis of the recommended textbooks.
Results: There is no fixed or explicit requirement to include women's health in Australian medical school curricula. Medical school course outlines do not adequately include women's health; similarly, clinical medicine textbooks do not account for sex and gender differences.
Conclusion: Important sex and gender differences in medicine are not reflected adequately in the medical school course outlines, curricula, or clinical textbooks. This may have significant consequences on women's health.