Piroska Östlin

Gender inequity in health: why it exists and how we can change it

This Special Supplement of Global Public Health brings together the short versions of eight reviews, written in 2007, as part of the work of the Women and Gender Equity Knowledge Network (WGEKN) of the World Health Organization (WHO) Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH). The authors of this introduction were coordinators of the WGEKN, which was established in 2006 and funded by the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs through WHO, the Swedish National Institute of Public Health (SNIPH), and the Foundation Open Society Institute (Zug). The task of the WGEKN was to synthesize knowledge and to develop recommendations about the mechanisms, processes, and actions that can be taken to reduce gender-based inequities in health. The recommendations of the WGEKN are included in this issue of the journal as an Appendix. The Final Report of the WGEKN (Sen et al. 2007) was submitted to the CSDH in September 2007.

Addressing social determinants of health inequities: what can the state and civil society do?

In this Health Policy article, we selected and reviewed evidence synthesised by nine knowledge networks established by WHO to support the Commission on the Social Determinants of Health. We have indicated the part that national governments and civil society can play in reducing health inequity. Government action can take three forms: (1) as provider or guarantor of human rights and essential services; (2) as facilitator of policy frameworks that provide the basis for equitable health improvement; and (3) as gatherer and monitor of data about their populations in ways that generate health information about mortality and morbidity and data about health equity. We use examples from the knowledge networks to illustrate some of the options governments have in fulfilling this role. Civil society takes many forms: here, we have used examples of community groups and social movements. Governments and civil society can have important positive roles in addressing health inequity if political will exists.

Engendering International Health: The Challenge of Equity

Engendering International Health presents the work of leading researchers on gender equity in international health. Growing economic inequalities reinforce social injustices, stall health gains, and deny good health to many. In particular, deep-seated gender biases in health research and policy institutions combine with a lack of well-articulated and accessible evidence to downgrade the importance of gender perspectives in health. The book?s central premise is that unless public health changes direction, it cannot effectively address the needs of those who are most marginalized, many of whom are women.The book offers evidence and analysis for both low- and high-income countries, providing a gender and health analysis cross-cut by a concern for other markers of social inequity, such as class and race. It details approaches and agendas that incorporate, but go beyond, commonly acknowledged issues relating to womens health; and it brings gender and equity analysis into the heart of the debates that dominate international health policy.

Priorities for research on equity and health: towards an equity-focused health research agenda.

Piroska Östlin and colleagues argue that a paradigm shift is needed to keep the focus on health equity within the social determinants of health research agenda.

The intersections of gender and class in health status and health care

Abstract It is increasingly recognized that different axes of social power relations, such as gender and class, are interrelated, not as additive but as intersecting processes. This paper has reviewed existing research on the intersections between gender and class, and their impacts on health status and access to health care. The review suggests that intersecting stratification processes can significantly alter the impacts of any one dimension of inequality taken by itself. Studies confirm that socio-economic status measures cannot fully account for gender inequalities in health. A number of studies show that both gender and class affect the way in which risk factors are translated into health outcomes, but their intersections can be complex. Other studies indicate that responses to unaffordable health care often vary by the gender and class location of sick individuals and their households. They strongly suggest that economic class should not be analysed by itself, and that apparent class differences can be misinterpreted without gender analysis. Insufficient attention to intersectionality in much of the health literature has significant human costs, because those affected most negatively tend to be those who are poorest and most oppressed by gender and other forms of social inequality. The programme and policy costs are also likely to be high in terms of poorly functioning programmes, and ineffective poverty alleviation and social and health policies.

Paying attention to gender and poverty in health research: content and process issues

Despite the magnitude of the problem of health inequity within and between countries, little systematic research has been done on the social causes of ill-health. Health researchers have overwhelmingly focused on biomedical research at the level of individuals. Investigations into the health of groups and the determinants of health inequities that lie outside the control of the individual have received a much smaller share of research resources. Ignoring factors such as socioeconomic class, race and gender leads to biases in both the content and process of research. We use two such factors--poverty and gender--to illustrate how this occurs. There is a systematic imbalance in medical journals: research into diseases that predominate in the poorest regions of the world is less likely to be published. In addition, the slow recognition of womens health problems, misdirected and partial approaches to understanding womens and mens health, and the dearth of information on how gender interacts with other social determinants continue to limit the content of health research. In the research community these imbalances in content are linked to biases against researchers from poorer regions and women. Researchers from high-income countries benefit from better funding and infrastructure. Their publications dominate journals and citations, and these researchers also dominate advisory boards. The way to move forward is to correct biases against poverty and gender in research content and processes and provide increased funding and better career incentives to support equity-linked research. Journals need to address equity concerns in their published content and in the publishing process. Efforts to broaden access to research information need to be well resourced, publicized and expanded.

Policies to improve the health and well-being of Roma people: The European experience

The Roma constitute the largest ethnic minority in the European Region. The many policy initiatives designed over the past two decades to tackle their adverse social conditions in Central and South Eastern Europe, where the Roma population is concentrated, have had limited success. This paper reviews what is being done to improve the health and social situation of Roma communities in the Region and identifies factors that may limit the effectiveness of these policy initiatives. Strong political commitment, measures to overcome prejudices against Roma, inter-sectoral policy coordination, adequate budgets, evidence-based policies, and Roma involvement can be identified as key preconditions for improved health outcomes and well-being. However, developing a sound evidence-based approach to Roma inclusion requires removing obstacles to the collection of reliable data and improving analytical and evaluation capacity. Health policies seeking to reduce health inequalities for Roma people need to be aligned with education, economic, labour market, housing, environmental and territorial development policies and form part of comprehensive policy frameworks allowing for effective integration.

Using risk analysis in Health Impact Assessment: the impact of different relative risks for men and women in different socio-economic groups

The aim of this study is to contribute to the emerging field of quantification of Health Impact Assessment (HIA), by analysing how different relative risks affect the burden of disease for various socio-economic groups (SES). Risk analysis, utilising attributable and impact fraction, raises several methodological considerations. The present study illustrates this by measuring the impact of changed distribution levels of smoking on lung cancer, ischemic heart disease (IHD), chronic obstructive lung disorder (COLD) and stroke for the highest and lowest socio-economic groups measured in disability adjusted life years (DALY). The material is based on relative risks obtained from various international studies, smoking prevalence (SP) data and the number of DALY based on data available for Sweden. The results show that if smoking would have been eliminated (attributable fraction, AF), the inequality between the highest and lowest socio-economic groups may decrease by 75% or increase by 21% depending on the size of the relative risk. Assuming the same smoking prevalence for the lowest socio-economic group as for the highest (impact fraction), then the inequality may decrease by 7-26%. Consequently, the size of the relative risk used may have a significant impact, leading to substantial biases and therefore should be taken into serious consideration in HIA.

Health insurance and accessibility to health services among Roma in settlements in Belgrade, Serbia—the journey from data to policy making

The Serbian constitution and health-related laws assert that citizens and residents are universally entitled to health care, provided that they hold health insurance. However, until 2010, persons who did not hold a national identification number (ID) were required to present a plethora of documents to be granted one. We assessed the relationship between citizenship, residency and possession of health insurance cards, together with utilization of health services, among Roma residing in disadvantaged settlements in Belgrade. The Roma Health and Nutrition Survey was conducted in 2009 to assess the social determinants of health among Roma. Data were analysed, using logistic regression, to examine health insurance status and utilization of services by citizenship and residency. Eighty-nine per cent of respondents said they were Serbian citizens. Approximately 11% were refugees, 7% internally displaced persons (IDPs) and remainder domicile. Multivariate analysis revealed that non-citizens were more likely to lack health insurance [odds ratio (OR) = 9.2, confidence interval (CI) (3.5, 24.1)], as were refugees and IDPs [OR = 3.1, CI (1.4, 6.9), OR = 4.0, CI (1.4, 11.5), respectively]. Having health insurance was a positive predictor for being seen by a physician [OR = 2.3, CI (1.3, 4.2), OR = 2.3, CI (1.3, 3.9)]. Data from this survey indicated that non-citizen Roma had limited access to health services. These findings led the Serbian Ministry of Health and National Health Insurance Fund to reduce the administrative and legislative hurdles in obtaining health insurance, to ensure the Roma rights to health care. This demonstration of data-driven policies on Roma health could serve as a model for other countries.

A response to Bates, Hankivsky and Springer on the WHO Knowledge Network on Women and Gender Equity Commission on Social Determinants of Health

0277-9536/