Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio

User menu

  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
British Journal of General Practice
Advertisement
  • RCGP
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • BJGP Open
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
    • RCGP e-Portfolio
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow bjgp on Twitter
  • Visit bjgp on Facebook
  • Blog
  • Listen to BJGP podcast
Advertisement
British Journal of General Practice

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • ONLINE FIRST
  • CURRENT ISSUE
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • SUBSCRIBE
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP
    • Conference
    • Advertising
    • BJGP Life
    • eLetters
    • Librarian information
    • Alerts
    • Resilience
    • Video
    • Audio
    • COVID-19 Clinical Solutions
Letters

Sex inequalities

Hugh Alberti
British Journal of General Practice 2006; 56 (529): 628.
Hugh Alberti
Newcastle University, Ariana, Tunisia Email:
Roles: GP and Postgraduate Student
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: Hugh.Alberti@newcastle.ac.uk
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Hippisley-Cox et al have reported evidence of sex inequalities in access to care for diabetes in primary care in the UK.1 We are undertaking a national study of the factors that influence the care of patients with diabetes in Tunisian primary care health centres, including a retrospective medical review of over 2000 patients from 48 centres. Our results suggest that sex inequalities in the care of patients with diabetes are international.

In our study,2 women with diabetes attending health centres are significantly younger than men, less likely to have type 1 diabetes, less educated, less likely to be working, less likely to be smokers and to drink alcohol and more likely to have cardiovascular disease. Women also have significantly higher levels of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol and body mass index but lower mean creatinine levels than men. These findings were all to be expected. However, Table 1 shows a selection of other data related to access of care suggesting significant differences between the care of men and women. Women are more likely to attend their appointment on time, but the time until their next given appointment is significantly longer. Women are also less likely to have their care recorded in the new disease-specific medical records. This is important, as we have shown that use of these records is associated with improved quality of care.3

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Differences between the care of men and women.

Sex inequalities in the care of patients with diabetes in primary care are not limited to the UK. We sincerely agree that further work is required to confirm, and if possible, explain these findings, and to seek ways of correcting these inequalities.

  • © British Journal of General Practice, 2006.

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Hippisley-Cox J,
    2. Yates J,
    3. Pringle M,
    4. et al.
    (2006) Sex inequalities in access to care for patients with diabetes in primary care: questionnaire survey. Br J Gen Pract 56:342–348.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Bouguerra R,
    2. Alberti H,
    3. Ben Salem L,
    4. et al.
    The global diabetes pandemic: the Tunisian experience. Eur J Clin Nutr, in press.
  3. ↵
    1. Alberti H,
    2. Boudriga N,
    3. Nabli M
    Disease-specific medical records improve the recording of processes of care in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Public Health, in press.
Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

British Journal of General Practice: 56 (529)
British Journal of General Practice
Vol. 56, Issue 529
August 2006
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Or,
sign in or create an account with your email address
Email Article

Thank you for recommending British Journal of General Practice.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Sex inequalities
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from British Journal of General Practice
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from British Journal of General Practice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Sex inequalities
Hugh Alberti
British Journal of General Practice 2006; 56 (529): 628.

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Sex inequalities
Hugh Alberti
British Journal of General Practice 2006; 56 (529): 628.
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Two-tiered medicine: the increasing disparity in medical care in the UK
  • MRCGP Recorded Consultation Assessment — the hidden fourth construct
  • Prostate-specific antigen testing and opportunistic prostate cancer screening — CAP intervention
Show more Letters

Related Articles

Cited By...

Advertisement

BJGP Life

BJGP Open

 

@BJGPjournal's Likes on Twitter

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • All Issues
  • Online First
  • Authors & reviewers

RCGP

  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • BJGP Open
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers
  • RCGP e-Portfolio

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Subscriber login
  • Activate subscription
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP: research
  • Writing for BJGP: other sections
  • BJGP editorial process & policies
  • BJGP ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Contact subscription agent
  • Copyright
  • Librarian information

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7679
Email: journal@rcgp.org.uk

British Journal of General Practice is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners
© 2021 British Journal of General Practice

Print ISSN: 0960-1643
Online ISSN: 1478-5242