• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

当医学期刊刊登医生的照片时,仍采用旧有的性别模式。男医生被描绘成积极的领导者,女医生则被刻画成倾听者、富有同情心的人。

[Old gender patterns still used when physicians are pictured in medical journals. Male physicians are portrayed as active leaders, women physicians as listening, compassionate].

作者信息

Eriksson Bodil, Johansson Eva E

机构信息

Institutionen för folkhälsa och klinisk medicin, Enheten för allmlinmedicin, Umeå universitet, SE-901 85 Umeå, Sweden.

出版信息

Lakartidningen. 2005;102(40):2840-2, 2844.

PMID:16255358
Abstract

As a part of a medical student' s research project on medical socialisation, the 2002 issue of two Swedish medicaljournals, Läkartidningen and Moderna Läkare, were scrutinized regarding how male and female physicians were represented on pictures. The outward façade was mostly male; 87% of portrays of editorials pictured a man, 81% of career announcements displayed men. Authors of articles and chroniclers more often presented a female face (55%). Photos in reports showed around 60% men and 40 % women, both regarding area and number of photos. These shares corresponded well to the actual share of male and female physicians in Sweden. The content analysis of pictures, however, demonstrated gender features: men were to a much higher degree focused in leading, demonstrating and speaker positions, while women to a higher degree were portrayed as taking part in consultations or caring activities.

摘要

作为一名医学生关于医学社会化研究项目的一部分,对瑞典两份医学期刊《柳叶刀》(Läkartidningen)和《现代医生》(Moderna Läkare)2002年刊中男性和女性医生的图片呈现方式进行了审查。期刊封面大多是男性形象;87%的社论配图是男性,81%的职业公告展示的是男性。文章作者和记录者更多呈现女性面孔(55%)。报道中的照片显示,无论从照片区域还是数量来看,男性约占60%,女性约占40%。这些比例与瑞典男女医生的实际比例相当。然而,图片的内容分析显示出性别特征:男性在领导、示范和演讲等位置上的聚焦程度要高得多,而女性则更多地被描绘为参与会诊或护理活动。

相似文献

1
[Old gender patterns still used when physicians are pictured in medical journals. Male physicians are portrayed as active leaders, women physicians as listening, compassionate].当医学期刊刊登医生的照片时,仍采用旧有的性别模式。男医生被描绘成积极的领导者,女医生则被刻画成倾听者、富有同情心的人。
Lakartidningen. 2005;102(40):2840-2, 2844.
2
[The doctor's gender is a social gender].医生的性别是一种社会性别。
Ugeskr Laeger. 2007 Jun 18;169(25):2413-5.
3
[The foundation of "feminine" and "masculine". Useful theories for the training of future physicians concerning the importance of gender].["“女性化”与“男性化”的基础。关于性别重要性的理论对未来医生培训的启示"]
Lakartidningen. 2000 Nov 15;97(46):5335-40.
4
Medical students' attitudes to gender issues in the role and career of physicians: a qualitative study conducted in Sweden.医学生对医生角色和职业中性别问题的态度:在瑞典进行的一项定性研究。
Med Teach. 2006 Nov;28(7):635-41. doi: 10.1080/01421590600871007.
5
[Teaching future physicians about gender differences. Gender of the physician does matter!].[向未来的医生传授性别差异。医生的性别确实很重要!]
Lakartidningen. 2000 Nov 15;97(46):5329-32.
6
Women as radiologists: are there barriers to entry and advancement?女性放射科医生:进入和晋升存在障碍吗?
J Am Coll Radiol. 2006 Feb;3(2):131-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jacr.2005.10.001.
7
The impact of gender stereotypes on the evaluation of general practitioners' communication skills: an experimental study using transcripts of physician-patient encounters.性别刻板印象对全科医生沟通技巧评估的影响:一项使用医患交流记录的实验研究
Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Dec;69(1-3):200-5. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.08.013. Epub 2007 Oct 17.
8
["I'm just a civil servant--neutral and sexless". About the resistance against the gender perspective and the risk of gender bias in medicine].["我只是一名公务员——中立且无性别特征”。关于医学领域中对性别视角的抵制以及性别偏见的风险]
Lakartidningen. 2005;102(40):2852-4.
9
[More women in the medical profession--a benefit?].[医学领域中有更多女性——这是一件好事吗?]
Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2000 Jan 10;120(1):85-7.
10
[In Lakartidningen 80 years ago: "Academic education for women is a bad preparation for motherhood"].
Lakartidningen. 2004 Jan 29;101(5):357.