3 ms·
This caught my eye, from the article: >A World Health Organization (WHO) report has also listed other barriers to adherence with hand-washing guidelines, inclu
by fuzxi 6y ago
This caught my eye, from the article:
>A World Health Organization (WHO) report has also listed other barriers to adherence with hand-washing guidelines, including:
>[...]
>Sinks are inconveniently located/shortage of sinks
>Lack of soap and paper towels
>Male sex
>Handwashing agents cause irritation and dryness
Uh, what? One of these things does not belong.
I was actually curious about this, so I followed the link to the WHO report. It cites two studies as evidence of "male sex" being a factor affecting handwashing adherence. I looked through the full text both of those studies, and...they make no mention of any such thing. One has zero instances of the term 'male' or 'man', the other has three as it comments on the demographics of the studied patients.
All this to say...where did this supposed factor come from?
- pfg 6y agoBoth studies[1][2] mention doctor's sex as a factor. "Effect of education and performance feedback on handwashing: the benefit of administrative support in Argentinean hospitals", for example, has these figures (calculated as Number of handwashings/Number of opportunities [to wash their hands?]): > Male vs female: 46% (1989/4350) vs 53% (5895/11,181) [1]: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3c8/bb1914d5226c719df53dd864e675d5061d4a.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3c8/bb1914d5226c719df53dd8... [2]: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8887/835e725b4347a5392e095a81ae2087f6d957.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8887/835e725b4347a5392e095a...
- fuzxi 6y agoThank you! I thought I must have been missing something. I have no clue why my ctrl+f returned only 3 results for the second study. I just trusted that the searches were accurate because the abstracts didn't mention sex as a factor.