造成活体肾脏捐赠性别差异的系统性因素:使用社会生态模型视角进行系统回顾和元综合。

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY American Journal of Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-10-09 DOI:10.1159/000541890
Katya Loban, Chloe Wong-Mersereau, Jewy Cates Ferrer, Lindsay Hales, Antoine Przybylak-Brouillard, Marcelo Cantarovich, Vivek B Kute, Anil K Bhalla, Rosemary Morgan, Shaifali Sandal
{"title":"造成活体肾脏捐赠性别差异的系统性因素:使用社会生态模型视角进行系统回顾和元综合。","authors":"Katya Loban, Chloe Wong-Mersereau, Jewy Cates Ferrer, Lindsay Hales, Antoine Przybylak-Brouillard, Marcelo Cantarovich, Vivek B Kute, Anil K Bhalla, Rosemary Morgan, Shaifali Sandal","doi":"10.1159/000541890","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The field of living kidney donation is profoundly gendered contributing to a predominance of women, mothers, and wives as living kidney donors (LKDs). Individual factors have traditionally been emphasized, and there is a limited appreciation of relational, community, and sociocultural influences in decision-making. We aimed to comprehensively capture existing evidence to examine the relative importance of these factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a systematic review of existing literature that has explored the motivation of different genders to become LKDs. Of the 3,188 records screened, 16 studies from 13 counties were included. Data were synthesized thematically using the Social-Ecological Model lens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the individual level, themes related to intrinsic motivation; thoughtful deliberation; and attitudes, fears, and beliefs; however, evidence demonstrating differences between men and women was minimal. Greater variation between genders emerged along the relational (coercion from family/network, relationship with the intended recipient, self-sacrifice within the family unit, and stability/acceptance within family); community (economic value and geographic proximity to recipient); and sociocultural (gendered societal roles, social norms and beliefs, social privilege, and legislation and policy) dimensions. The relative importance of each factor varied by context; cultural components were inferred in each study, and economic considerations seemed to transcend the gender divide.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A complex interplay of factors at relational, community, and sociocultural levels influences gender roles, relations, and norms and manifests as gender disparities in living kidney donation. Our findings suggest that to address gender disparities in living donation, dismantling of deep-rooted systemic contributors to gender inequities is needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7570,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Systemic Factors Contributing to Gender Differences in Living Kidney Donation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis Using the Social-Ecological Model Lens.\",\"authors\":\"Katya Loban, Chloe Wong-Mersereau, Jewy Cates Ferrer, Lindsay Hales, Antoine Przybylak-Brouillard, Marcelo Cantarovich, Vivek B Kute, Anil K Bhalla, Rosemary Morgan, Shaifali Sandal\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000541890\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The field of living kidney donation is profoundly gendered contributing to a predominance of women, mothers, and wives as living kidney donors (LKDs). Individual factors have traditionally been emphasized, and there is a limited appreciation of relational, community, and sociocultural influences in decision-making. We aimed to comprehensively capture existing evidence to examine the relative importance of these factors.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a systematic review of existing literature that has explored the motivation of different genders to become LKDs. Of the 3,188 records screened, 16 studies from 13 counties were included. Data were synthesized thematically using the Social-Ecological Model lens.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At the individual level, themes related to intrinsic motivation; thoughtful deliberation; and attitudes, fears, and beliefs; however, evidence demonstrating differences between men and women was minimal. Greater variation between genders emerged along the relational (coercion from family/network, relationship with the intended recipient, self-sacrifice within the family unit, and stability/acceptance within family); community (economic value and geographic proximity to recipient); and sociocultural (gendered societal roles, social norms and beliefs, social privilege, and legislation and policy) dimensions. The relative importance of each factor varied by context; cultural components were inferred in each study, and economic considerations seemed to transcend the gender divide.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A complex interplay of factors at relational, community, and sociocultural levels influences gender roles, relations, and norms and manifests as gender disparities in living kidney donation. Our findings suggest that to address gender disparities in living donation, dismantling of deep-rooted systemic contributors to gender inequities is needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541890\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541890","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:活体肾脏捐献领域存在严重的性别问题,导致女性、母亲和妻子成为活体肾脏捐献者(LKD)的主力军。传统上,个人因素一直受到重视,而对决策中的关系、社区和社会文化影响的认识却很有限。我们旨在全面收集现有证据,研究这些因素的相对重要性:这是对现有文献的一次系统性回顾,这些文献探讨了不同性别成为长者促进者的动机。在筛选出的 3188 条记录中,来自 13 个县的 16 项研究被纳入其中。我们使用社会生态模型视角对数据进行了专题综合:在个人层面,主题与内在动机、深思熟虑以及态度、恐惧和信念有关;但是,显示男女差异的证据很少。在关系(来自家庭/网络的胁迫、与预期受助人的关系、家庭单位内的自我牺牲以及家庭内的稳定性/接受度)、社区(经济价值以及与受助人的地理距离)和社会文化(性别化的社会角色、社会规范和信仰、社会特权以及立法和政策)方面,男女之间的差异较大。每个因素的相对重要性因情况而异;每项研究都推断出了文化因素,而经济因素似乎超越了性别鸿沟:结论:关系、社区和社会文化层面的各种因素复杂地相互作用,影响着性别角色、关系和规范,并在活体肾脏捐赠中表现为性别差异。我们的研究结果表明,要解决活体肾脏捐献中的性别差异问题,需要消除造成性别不平等的根深蒂固的系统性因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Systemic Factors Contributing to Gender Differences in Living Kidney Donation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis Using the Social-Ecological Model Lens.

Introduction: The field of living kidney donation is profoundly gendered contributing to a predominance of women, mothers, and wives as living kidney donors (LKDs). Individual factors have traditionally been emphasized, and there is a limited appreciation of relational, community, and sociocultural influences in decision-making. We aimed to comprehensively capture existing evidence to examine the relative importance of these factors.

Methods: This was a systematic review of existing literature that has explored the motivation of different genders to become LKDs. Of the 3,188 records screened, 16 studies from 13 counties were included. Data were synthesized thematically using the Social-Ecological Model lens.

Results: At the individual level, themes related to intrinsic motivation; thoughtful deliberation; and attitudes, fears, and beliefs; however, evidence demonstrating differences between men and women was minimal. Greater variation between genders emerged along the relational (coercion from family/network, relationship with the intended recipient, self-sacrifice within the family unit, and stability/acceptance within family); community (economic value and geographic proximity to recipient); and sociocultural (gendered societal roles, social norms and beliefs, social privilege, and legislation and policy) dimensions. The relative importance of each factor varied by context; cultural components were inferred in each study, and economic considerations seemed to transcend the gender divide.

Conclusions: A complex interplay of factors at relational, community, and sociocultural levels influences gender roles, relations, and norms and manifests as gender disparities in living kidney donation. Our findings suggest that to address gender disparities in living donation, dismantling of deep-rooted systemic contributors to gender inequities is needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Nephrology
American Journal of Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
74
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The ''American Journal of Nephrology'' is a peer-reviewed journal that focuses on timely topics in both basic science and clinical research. Papers are divided into several sections, including:
期刊最新文献
Cross-generational impact of maternal exposure to low level of PM2.5 on kidney health. Impact of Peritoneal Neutrophil Extracellular Traps on Peritoneal Characteristics and Technical Failure in Patients Undergoing Peritoneal Dialysis. Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist combined with a SGLT2 inhibitor versus SGLT2 inhibitor alone in chronic kidney disease: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. The Interplay of Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Call for Integrated Management. Incidence of Adult Primary Immunoglobulin A Nephropathy Among a Racially/Ethnically Diverse Population in the United States.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1