medigraphic.com

2020, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Revista Colombiana de Bioética 2020; 15 (1)

Epistemology, health, and gender: dialogues between cardiology and social sciences

Moutran-Barroso HG

Language: Spanish
References: 25
Page:
PDF size: 206.78 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Purpose/Context. This article aims to emphasize the importance of feminist epistemologies and ethics to medical knowledge, especially cardiology. Significant biases in the distinction between sex and gender categories in medicine motivate the discussion.
Method/Approach. The approach guiding this article is Sandra Harding’s standpoint feminism, supplemented by the views of female doctors and philosophers who work on the philosophy of science-cardiology intersection.
Results/Findings. The results obtained from this review contribute to the debate on the benefits of a medical approach based on feminist theories and propose more holistic medical care in different health settings.
Discussion/Conclusions/Contributions. Analyzing these categories based on public health and epistemology will create opportunities to offer better care to women, especially in conditions such as coronary heart disease, which is one of the main causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide. Besides, the social, political, historical, cultural, and ethical commitments that all medical practice must make in structuring knowledge are emphasized.


REFERENCES

  1. Fernández-Sáez, José, Maria Teresa Ruiz-Cantero, Marta Guijarro-Garví, MercedesCarrasco-Portiño, Victoria Roca-Pérez, Elisa Chilet-Rosell, y CarlosÁlvarez-Dardet. 2013. “Looking twice at the gender equity index forpublic health impact.” BMC Public Health, 13, no. 659. https://dx.doi.org/10.1186%2F1471-2458-13-659

  2. Garcia, Mariana, Sharon L. Mulvagh, C. Noel Bairey Merz, Julie E. Buring, y JoAnnE. Manson. 2016. “Cardiovascular disease in women: Clinical perspectives.”Circulation Research, 118, no. 8: 1273-1293. https://dx.doi.org/10.1161%2FCIRCRESAHA.116.307547

  3. . Hammarström, Anne, y Gunnel Hensing. 2018. “How gender theories are used incontemporary public health research.” International Journal for Equity in Health,17, no. 34. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0712-x

  4. Harding, Sandra G. 1991. Whose science? Whose knowledge?: Thinking from women’slives. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7591/j.ctt1hhfnmg

  5. Harding, Sandra G. 1996. Ciencia y feminismo. Madrid: Ediciones Mortada.

  6. Humphries, Karin. H., Mona Izadnegadar, Tara Sedlak, Jacqueline Saw, Nina Johnston,Schenck- Karin Gustafsson, R. U. Shah, et al. 2017. “Sex differences incardiovascular disease-impact on care and outcomes.” Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology46: 46-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2017.04.001

  7. Kendel, Friederike, Götz Gelbrich, Markus Wirtz, Elke Lehmkuhl, Nina Knoll,Roland Hetzer, y Vera Regitz-Zagrosek. 2010. "Predictive relationship betweendepression and physical functioning after coronary surgery." Archives of InternalMedicine 170, no. 19: 1717-1721. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2010.368

  8. Krieger, Nancy. 1996. “Inequality, diversity, and health: Thoughts on "race/ethnicity"and "gender".” Journal of the American Medical Women's Association 51,no. 4: 133-136.

  9. Krieger, Nancy. 2003. “Genders, sexes, and health: What are the connections —and why does it matter?” International Journal of Epidemiology 32, no. 4: 652-657. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyg156

  10. Krieger, Nancy. 2012. “Methods for the scientific study of discrimination and health:An ecosocial approach.” American Journal of Public Health 102, no. 5: 936-944. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2011.300544

  11. Intemann, Kristen, e Inmaculada de Melo-Martín. 2014. "Addressing problems inprofit-driven research: How can feminist conceptions of objectivity help?" EuropeanJournal for Philosophy of Science 4: 135-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-013-0079-9

  12. Lloyd-Jones, Donald, Robert J. Adams, Todd M. Brown, Mercedes Carnethon, ShifanDai, Giovanni De Simone, T. Bruce Ferguson, et al. 2010. “Heart diseaseand stroke statistics--2010 update: A report from the american heart association.”Circulation 121, no. 7: e46-e215.

  13. Melo-Martín, Inmaculada de, y Kristen K Intemann. 2007. “Can ethical reasoningcontribute to better epidemiology? A case study in research on racial healthdisparities.” European Journal of Epidemiology 22, no. 4: 215-221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-007-9108-3

  14. Ministerio de Salud y Protección Social. 2018. “Análisis de situación de salud(ASIS).” Última actualización, 28 de noviembre, 2018. https://www.minsalud.gov.co/salud/publica/epidemiologia/Paginas/analisis-de-situacion-de-salud-.aspx

  15. Mortensen, Ole Steen, Jakob B Bjorner, Beth Newman, Brian Oldenburg, MogensGroenvold, Jan K Madsen, Henning R Andersen, y DANAMI-2 Study Group.2007. “Gender differences in health-related quality of life following ST-elevationmyocardial infarction: Women and men do not benefit from primary percutaneouscoronary intervention to the same degree.” European Journal of CardiovascularPrevention and Rehabilitation 14, no. 1: 37-43. https://doi.org/10.1097/hjr.0b013e3280114f00

  16. Regitz-Zagrosek, Vera. 2006. “Therapeutic implications of the gender-specific aspectsof cardiovascular disease.” Nature Reviews. Drug Discovery 5, no. 5: 425-438. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrd2032

  17. Regitz-Zagrosek, Vera. 2011. “Sex and gender differences in symptoms of myocardialischaemia.” European Heart Journal 32, no. 24: 3064-3066. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehr272

  18. Regitz-Zagrosek, Vera. 2012. “Sex and gender differences in health.” EMBO Reports13,no. 7: 596-603. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fembor.2012.87

  19. Regitz-Zagrosek, Vera. 2017. “Gender and cardiovascular diseases: Why we needgender medicine.” Der Internist 58, no. 4: 336-343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00108-017-0214-3

  20. Rivera Sanín, María Lucía. 2017. “Mujeres y pobreza: Una discusión entre universalismoy el paternalismo.” Revista Colombiana de Bioética 11, no. 3: 62-72.https://doi.org/10.18270/rcb.v11i3.2161

  21. Ruiz Cantero, María Teresa, y María Verdú Delgado. 2004. “Sesgos de género en elesfuerzo terapéutico.” Gaceta Sanitaria 18, no. 1: 118-125.

  22. Ruiz Cantero, María Teresa. 2009. Sesgos de género en la atención sanitaria. Alicante:Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública

  23. Shannon, Geordan, Melanie Jansen, Kate Williams, Carlos Cáceres, Angelica Motta, AloyceOdhiambo, Alie Eleveld, y Jenevieve Mannell. 2019. “Gender equality in science,medicine, and global health: Where are we at and why does it matter?” The Lancet393, no. 10171: 560-569. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)33135-0

  24. Zakiniaeiz, Y., Kelly P. Cosgrove, Marc N. Potenza, y Carolyn M. Mazure. 2016.“Balance of the sexes: Addressing sex differences in preclinical research.” TheYale Journal of Biology and Medicine 89, no. 2: 255-259. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27354851/

  25. Zucker, Irving, y Annaliese K Beery. 2010. “Males still dominate animal studies.”Nature 465, no. 7299: 690. https://doi.org/10.1038/465690a




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com