How to carry out participatory research that takes account of sex and gender issues: a scoping review of guidelines targeting health inequities

• Published in: Canadian journal of public health Vol. 114; no. 3; pp. 404 - 421
• Main Authors: Lefrançois, Mélanie, Sultan-Taïeb, Hélène, Webb, Jena, Gervais, Mathieu-Joël, Messing, Karen, Blanchette-Luong, Vanessa, Riel, Jessica, Saint-Charles, Johanne, Faust, Rachel, Vaillancourt, Cathy, Fillion, Myriam, Laberge, Marie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Cham Springer International Publishing 01.06.2023; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Cluster analysis; Community-Based Participatory Research; Data Collection; Empowerment; Environmental health; Female; Gender; Gender Identity; Guidelines; Health disparities; Health Inequities; Humans; Male; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Occupational health; Participatory research; Public Health; Sex; Sex discrimination; Similarity; Systematic Review; Typology; Sex and gender; Intersectional; recherche participative; Participatory research; recherche intervention; intersectionnalité; transfert de connaissances; inégalités; Inequities; Knowledge transfer; Research intervention; Sexe et genre
• ISSN: 0008-4263; 1920-7476
• DOI: 10.17269/s41997-023-00742-z

Objective Conducting participatory research (PR) aimed at improving health implies considering inequitable power relations, including those related to sex/gender (S/G). This necessitates specific skills and methods and may be challenging especially since guidelines are scarce. Our objective was to perform a scoping review to provide a typology of existing guidelines for researchers on how to take account of S/G in the context of PR in public health, with a focus on occupational and environmental health. Methods All steps of the research were conducted with the collaboration of an advisory committee, following PR principles. Nineteen documents were retained from 513 references identified in nine scientific databases and grey literature between 2000 and 2020. Data on recommendations were extracted and coded qualitatively. Cluster analysis based on similarities in recommendations proposed in the documents identified four types: (1) empowerment-centered; (2) concrete action-centered; (3) macrosystem-centered; and (4) stakeholder-centered. Synthesis Many sources gave pointers on how to include S/G during data collection and analysis or during the dissemination of findings, but there was a dearth of suggestions for building partnerships with stakeholders and producing sustainable S/G sociopolitical transformations. Occupational health PR showed less similarities with other public health subfields including environmental health PR. Power relationships with workplace stakeholders generated specific obstacles related to S/G integration that require further attention. Intersectionality and reflexive practices emerged as overarching themes. Conclusion This review provides helpful guidelines to researchers at different stages of planning PR, ranging from familiarizing themselves with S/G approaches to anticipating difficulties in their ongoing S/G-transformative PR.