1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      COVID-19: Cultural Predictors of Gender Differences in Global Prevalence Patterns

      discussion

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Puzzling differences are emerging between male and female infection and death rates for COVID-19 (1). We predict that this may be amplified, especially in the developing world, due to hitherto overlooked cultural factors. Currently, credible data from low- and lower middle-income countries on COVID-19 are sparse, with recorded case numbers seemingly suppressed by unreliable surveillance, lesser testing capacity and an underlying burden of infectious diseases that may mimic key symptoms, notably pyrexia. Indeed, acute undifferentiated febrile illness is a common feature of resource-limited tropical regions. Patterns of prevalence of vector-borne diseases in the developing world, however, offer an indication of likely COVID-19 infection and morbidity gender trends. Cultural factors, in particular the extent to which long or “modest” clothing is worn and the convention of separating adults by gender, may inadvertently determine the rapidity and extent of the spread of communicable diseases including COVID-19. A study of six Asian countries on the prevalence of dengue showed a striking tendency toward greater infection rates for males compared to females, but only for those aged 15 or over for whom cultural differences in work patterns outside the home, social interaction and dress all apply (2). This disparity is plausibly explained as a difference in exposure to the mosquito vector and is linked to established recommendations on wearing protective clothing. However, it is noteworthy that in Brazil, where standards of modesty for male and female clothing are equivalent (3), this gender difference in dengue incidence disappears (4). Cultures that place greater restrictions on the movement and dress of women are likely to see fewer opportunities for both vector- and air-borne pathogen transmission for women relative to men. One of the known routes of infection with SARS-CoV-2 is touching one's face, leading to public health agency advisories against this practice (5, 6). This presents a challenge to community education since this behavior is instinctive (7), habitual and very frequent (8). Yet, in conservative Muslim cultures in particular, where wearing a burka or niqab, providing full or partial coverage of the face, respectively, is relatively common in public, touching of mouth, nose and eyes by females is correspondingly restricted. Even in the increasingly observed instances of where the “modesty" function of covering the hair and face is separated from the traditional (often religious) purpose of the clothing (9), such practices have this unintended public health value. Facial covering additionally affords a limited level of filtration of air-borne droplets (10), such as those carrying virus particles. In contrast, the cultural predilection for facial hair among male Muslims is likely to further increase male exposure to the virus, particularly amongst health professionals where facial hair compromises the seal of P2/N95-standard particulate filtering respirators and surgical masks (11). In a recent analysis of gender and COVID-19, a working group argued that “policies and health impacts have not addressed the gendered impacts of disease outbreaks” (12), but the interaction between gender roles and disease exposure was overlooked in their analysis. In other cultures, or indeed subcultures, where versions of the veil or other passive forms of discouragement of facial touching are absent, but where strict or partial segregation of genders is observed due to cultural norms (e.g., among Amish communities in the United States, or in Orthodox Jewish communities in Israel) (13, 14) pathways to community transmission are likely to be impinged. Of course, more highly-segregated workforces and family life is seen in traditional societies regardless of the prevalent religion or other belief system. The segregation between genders is apparent even in industrialized nations, albeit less overtly, where it impacts on the involvement of women in society itself (such as the extent to which females engage in certain occupations or roles outside the home) [e.g., (15, 16)]. This lower level of engagement in society beyond the customary domestic and childcare functions may even, in extreme cases, reduce the likelihood of women attending a health clinic to receive a diagnosis (and treatment), leading to underreporting of diseases among adult females. For instance, in rural and remote regions there is often a gender imbalance in favor of male medical practitioners (17). In combination with strong cultural inhibitors that are frequently prevalent in isolated communities toward women interacting with men outside their family group (18), women may not expressly seek medical attention. Here, we argue that cultural factors may impact on the gender balance of reported COVID-19 infection prevalence in systematic ways, particularly in conservative societies, whether religious or secular, around the world. This is to say: women may be afforded some protection by customs relating to traditional clothing; they may be placed at less risk of contracting infection through distancing from men or separation from the broader workforce and community; and — by their known reluctance to be attended by a male medical practitioner and so be less disposed to seek a qualified diagnosis — they may be underrepresented in data collected on infection and morbidity. Author Contributions OM and AT-R made substantial contributions to the conception of the work and to literature search, contributed significantly to writing the manuscript, revised it critically for important intellectual content, approved its final version, and agreed to its submission. Conflict of Interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          COVID-19: the gendered impacts of the outbreak

          Policies and public health efforts have not addressed the gendered impacts of disease outbreaks. 1 The response to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) appears no different. We are not aware of any gender analysis of the outbreak by global health institutions or governments in affected countries or in preparedness phases. Recognising the extent to which disease outbreaks affect women and men differently is a fundamental step to understanding the primary and secondary effects of a health emergency on different individuals and communities, and for creating effective, equitable policies and interventions. Although sex-disaggregated data for COVID-19 show equal numbers of cases between men and women so far, there seem to be sex differences in mortality and vulnerability to the disease. 2 Emerging evidence suggests that more men than women are dying, potentially due to sex-based immunological 3 or gendered differences, such as patterns and prevalence of smoking. 4 However, current sex-disaggregated data are incomplete, cautioning against early assumptions. Simultaneously, data from the State Council Information Office in China suggest that more than 90% of health-care workers in Hubei province are women, emphasising the gendered nature of the health workforce and the risk that predominantly female health workers incur. 5 The closure of schools to control COVID-19 transmission in China, Hong Kong, Italy, South Korea, and beyond might have a differential effect on women, who provide most of the informal care within families, with the consequence of limiting their work and economic opportunities. Travel restrictions cause financial challenges and uncertainty for mostly female foreign domestic workers, many of whom travel in southeast Asia between the Philippines, Indonesia, Hong Kong, and Singapore. 6 Consideration is further needed of the gendered implications of quarantine, such as whether women and men's different physical, cultural, security, and sanitary needs are recognised. Experience from past outbreaks shows the importance of incorporating a gender analysis into preparedness and response efforts to improve the effectiveness of health interventions and promote gender and health equity goals. During the 2014–16 west African outbreak of Ebola virus disease, gendered norms meant that women were more likely to be infected by the virus, given their predominant roles as caregivers within families and as front-line health-care workers. 7 Women were less likely than men to have power in decision making around the outbreak, and their needs were largely unmet. 8 For example, resources for reproductive and sexual health were diverted to the emergency response, contributing to a rise in maternal mortality in a region with one of the highest rates in the world. 9 During the Zika virus outbreak, differences in power between men and women meant that women did not have autonomy over their sexual and reproductive lives, 10 which was compounded by their inadequate access to health care and insufficient financial resources to travel to hospitals for check-ups for their children, despite women doing most of the community vector control activities. 11 Given their front-line interaction with communities, it is concerning that women have not been fully incorporated into global health security surveillance, detection, and prevention mechanisms. Women's socially prescribed care roles typically place them in a prime position to identify trends at the local level that might signal the start of an outbreak and thus improve global health security. Although women should not be further burdened, particularly considering much of their labour during health crises goes underpaid or unpaid, incorporating women's voices and knowledge could be empowering and improve outbreak preparedness and response. Despite the WHO Executive Board recognising the need to include women in decision making for outbreak preparedness and response, 12 there is inadequate women's representation in national and global COVID-19 policy spaces, such as in the White House Coronavirus Task Force. 13 © 2020 Miguel Medina/Contributor/Getty Images 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. If the response to disease outbreaks such as COVID-19 is to be effective and not reproduce or perpetuate gender and health inequities, it is important that gender norms, roles, and relations that influence women's and men's differential vulnerability to infection, exposure to pathogens, and treatment received, as well as how these may differ among different groups of women and men, are considered and addressed. We call on governments and global health institutions to consider the sex and gender effects of the COVID-19 outbreak, both direct and indirect, and conduct an analysis of the gendered impacts of the multiple outbreaks, incorporating the voices of women on the front line of the response to COVID-19 and of those most affected by the disease within preparedness and response policies or practices going forward.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sex difference and smoking predisposition in patients with COVID-19

            Hua Cai (2020)
            The outbreak of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is quickly turning into a pandemic. Although the disease is now better contained in China, 32 702 cases remain as of March 2, 2020. 10 566 cases and 166 deaths outside of China had been reported as of March 3 (WHO situation report 43), which is a large increase from the 2918 cases and 44 deaths reported on Feb 26 (WHO situation report 37). Rapid progress has been made with diagnostic reagents (eg, nucleic acid and IgM or IgG detection, or both), drug repurposing (eg, remdesivir and chloroquine), and vaccine production. Studies on the biology of viral infection and clinical management of the disease have also been published, some of which have demonstrated that differences in COVID-19 disease prevalence and severity are associated with sex, and smoking is related to higher expression of ACE2 (the receptor for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]), so that might also be a factor. One study (preprint), 1 using single-cell sequencing, found that expression of ACE2 was more predominant in Asian men, which might be the reason for the higher prevalence of COVID-19 in this subgroup of patients than in women and patients of other ethnicities. One study of 140 patients with COVID-19 in China, 2 found the sex distribution equal; whereas, in a study of critically ill patients, 3 more men were affected (67%) than women. In a latest report 4 of 1099 patients with COVID-19 from 552 hospitals in 30 provinces in China, 58% of the patients were men. Taken together, these data seem to indicate that there might be a sex predisposition to COVID-19, with men more prone to being affected. This sex predisposition might be associated with the much higher smoking rate in men than in women in China (288 million men vs 12·6 million women were smokers in 2018). Of note, one study (preprint) 5 found that although ACE2 expression was not significantly different between Asian and white people, men and women, or subgroups aged older and younger than 60 years, it was significantly higher in current smokers of Asian ethnicity than Asian non-smokers; although no difference was found between smokers and non-smokers who were white. Nonetheless, the current literature does not support smoking as a predisposing factor in men or any subgroup for infection with SARS-CoV-2. In the study by Zhang and colleagues, 2 only 1·4% of patients were current smokers, although this number was much higher at 12·6% in the study by Guan and colleagues. 4 The relatively small proportion of current smokers in each of these two studies compared with the proportion of male smokers in China (50·5%) are unlikely to be associated with incidence or severity of COVID-19. A trend towards an association was seen between smoking and severity of COVID-19 in the study by Zhang and colleagues 2 (11·8% of smokers had non-severe disease vs 16·9% of smokers with severe disease), but it was not significant. Without strong evidence of an association between smoking and prevalence or severity of COVID-19 in Asian men compared with other subgroups, no firm conclusions can be drawn. With more cases being examined from different ethnic and genetic backgrounds worldwide, ACE2 expression variation can be better analysed and compared to establish whether it contributes to susceptibility to COVID-19 across the different subgroups. © 2020 Kateryna Kon/Science Photo Library 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Male-female differences in the number of reported incident dengue fever cases in six Asian countries.

              Demographic factors, such as age and sex, are associated with the likelihood of exposure to Aedes aegypti, the vector for dengue. However, dengue data disaggregated by both sex and age are not routinely reported or analysed by national surveillance systems. This study analysed the reported number of incident dengue cases by age and sex for six countries in Asia. Data for the Lao People's Democratic Republic, the Philippines, Singapore and Sri Lanka were obtained from DengueNet; the number of male and female dengue cases was available for four age groups (< 1, 1-4, 5-14 and ≥ 15 years) over a cumulative period of six to 10 years. Data for Cambodia (2010) and Malaysia (1997-2008) were obtained from their respective ministries of health. An excess of males was found among reported dengue cases ≥ 15 years of age. This pattern was observed consistently over several years across six culturally and economically diverse countries. These data indicated the importance of reporting data stratified by both sex and age since collapsing the data over all ages would have masked some of the male-female differences. To target preventive measures appropriately, assessment of gender by age is important for dengue because biological or gender-related factors can change over the human lifespan and gender-related factors may differ across countries.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Public Health
                Front Public Health
                Front. Public Health
                Frontiers in Public Health
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2296-2565
                30 April 2020
                2020
                30 April 2020
                : 8
                : 174
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Sustainable Innovation, School of Business & Law, Central Queensland University , Brisbane, QLD, Australia
                [2] 2Infectious Diseases Research Group, School of Health, Medical & Applied Sciences, Central Queensland University , Brisbane, QLD, Australia
                Author notes

                Edited by: Zisis Kozlakidis, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), France

                Reviewed by: Yunchang Shao, China National GeneBank (BGI), China

                *Correspondence: Andrew W. Taylor-Robinson a.taylor-robinson@ 123456cqu.edu.au

                This article was submitted to Infectious Diseases - Surveillance, Prevention and Treatment, a section of the journal Frontiers in Public Health

                Article
                10.3389/fpubh.2020.00174
                7203575
                32426319
                ed72f9d3-942d-4fa0-85c0-1b479fb5e08c
                Copyright © 2020 Muurlink and Taylor-Robinson.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 04 April 2020
                : 21 April 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 18, Pages: 2, Words: 1645
                Categories
                Public Health
                Opinion

                covid-19,dengue,transmission,culture,religion,gender,traditional clothing,facial touching

                Comments

                Comment on this article