Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Sep 9:58:e20240066.
doi: 10.1590/1980-220X-REEUSP-2024-0066en. eCollection 2024.

Analysis of care and gender stereotypes in nursing scientific research: a scoping review

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Gabriela Duarte Almeida Mundim  1 , Maria Raquel Gomes Maia Pires  2 , Maria Verônica Sousa Torres  2 , Aline Oliveira Silveira  2
Affiliations

Analysis of care and gender stereotypes in nursing scientific research: a scoping review

[Article in English, Portuguese]
Gabriela Duarte Almeida Mundim et al. Rev Esc Enferm USP. .

Abstract
in English, Spanish

Objective: To map evidence about care and gender stereotypes in nursing scientific research.

Method: A scoping review developed under the JBI framework with analysis of gender perspective in care approaches. The searches were carried out on January 31, 2023 in SciELO, Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed, BDENF.

Results: Of the 3,743 studies located, 25 were included. Evidence was grouped into categories: essentially female care (n = 9; 36%); calling and service of love (n = 3; 12%); erasure of gender inequalities (n = 2; 8%); "inadequate and harmful" care (n = 5; 20%); neutralization of gender and bodies (n = 3; 12%); and reporting oppression in care work (n = 3; 12%).

Conclusion: Most scientific research on care reproduces gender stereotypes that reinforce the oppression of women in nursing. In contrast, resistance denounces naturalization of care as "inadequate and harmful", for perpetuating gender oppression in care work.

Objetivo:: Mapear evidencias sobre cuidados y estereotipos de género en la producción científica de enfermería.

Método:: Revisión de alcance desarrollada en el marco del JBI con análisis de la perspectiva de género en los enfoques de cuidado. Las búsquedas se realizaron el 31 de enero de 2023 en SciELO, Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed, BDENF.

Resultados:: De los 3.743 estudios localizados se incluyeron 25. La evidencia se agrupó en las categorías: cuidado esencialmente femenino (n = 9; 36%); llamado y servicio de amor (n = 3; 12%); eliminación de las desigualdades de género (n = 2; 8%); atención “inadecuada y nociva” (n = 5; 20%); neutralización de género y cuerpos (n = 3; 12%); y reportando opresión en el trabajo de cuidados (n = 3; 12%).

Conclusión:: La mayor parte de la producción científica sobre cuidados reproduce estereotipos de género que refuerzan la opresión de las mujeres en la enfermería. En cambio, la resistencia denuncia la naturalización de los cuidados como “inadecuada y dañina”, por perpetuar la opresión de género en el trabajo de cuidados.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. PRISMA study selection flowchart.
Figura 1
Figura 1. Fluxograma PRISMA de seleção dos estudos.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Pires MRGM, Fonseca RMGS, Padilla B. A politicidade do cuidado na crítica aos estereótipos de gênero. Rev Bras Enferm. 2016;69(6):1223–30. doi: 10.1590/0034-7167-2016-0441. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tronto J. ¿Riesgo o cuidado? Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires: Fundación Medifé Edita. 2020. [cited 2023 Mar 2]. Available from: https://www.fundacionmedife.com.ar/sites/default/files/Edita/Horizontes-... .
    1. Spinelli L. Joan Tronto: relational responsibility, recognition of privileges and vulnerability. [[cited 2023 Mar 2]];Princípios. 2022 Feb 28;29(58):66–83. Available from: https://periodicos.ufrn.br/principios/article/view/23774 .
    1. Biroli F, Quintela DF. Sexual division of labor, separation and hierarchy: contributions to the analysis of the gender of democracies. [[cited 2023 Mar 2]];Rev. Pol & Trab. 2021 Mar 23;1(53):72–89. Available from: https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/politicaetrabalho/article/view/51417 .
    1. Machado MH, Koster I, Aguiar W, Filho, Wermelinger MCMW, Freire NP, Pereira EJ. Labor market and regulatory processes – Nursing in Brazil. Cien Saude Colet. 2020;25(1):101–12. doi: 10.1590/1413-81232020251.27552019. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources