Author:
Phillips Susan P.,Gee Katrina,Wells Laura
Abstract
In this commentary, we explore the disproportionate risk women experience with the insertion of various medical devices. Although pre-market device testing and complication tracking could be improved for all, a failure to consider sex differences in hormones, anatomy, inflammatory responses, and physical function puts women at particular risk. This invisibility of women is an example of gender bias in medical science and practice, a bias that could be corrected in the ways we suggest.
Funder
Queen’s University’s Wicked Ideas
Subject
Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference20 articles.
1. Medical Devices: Definition, Classification, and Regulatory Implications;Aronson;Drug Saf.,2019
2. Ross, S., Weijer, C., Gafni, A., Ducey, A., Thompson, C., and LaFreniere, R. Ethics, economics and the regulation and adoption of new medical devices: Case studies in pelvic floor surgery. BMC Med. Ethics, 2010. 11.
3. Lenzer, J. The Danger within Us, 2017.
4. Available online: https://www.icij.org/investigations/implant-files/are-women-more-likely-to-be-harmed-by-medical-device-failures/. 2021.
5. We Used AI to Identify the Sex of 340,000 People Harmed by Medical Devices. 2021.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献