A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

Systemic Factors Contributing to Gender Differences in Living Kidney Donation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis Using the Social-Ecological Model Lens. | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

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.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000541890DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

living kidney
16
kidney donation
12
systematic review
8
social-ecological model
8
relational community
8
community sociocultural
8
gender disparities
8
disparities living
8
gender
6
living
5

Similar Publications