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.
Tailoring psychological treatments to men’s specific needs has been a topic of concern for decades given evidence that many men are reticent to seek professional health care. However, existing literature providing clinical recommendations for engaging men in psychological treatments is diffuse. The aim of this scoping review was to provide a comprehensive summary of recommendations for how to engage men in psychological treatment. Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched for articles published between 2000 and 2017. Titles and abstracts were reviewed; data extracted and synthesized thematically. Of 3,627 citations identified, 46 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty articles (65%) were reviews or commentaries; 23 (50%) provided broad recommendations for working with all men. Findings indicate providing male-appropriate psychological treatment requires clinicians to consider the impact of masculine socialization on their client and themselves, and how gender norms may impact clinical engagement and outcomes. Existing literature also emphasized specific process micro-skills (e.g., self-disclosure, normalizing), language adaption (e.g., male-oriented metaphors) and treatment styles most engaging for men (e.g., collaborative, transparent, action-oriented, goal-focused). Presented are clinical recommendations for how to engage men in psychological treatments including paying attention to tapping the strengths of multiple masculinities coexisting within and across men. Our review suggests more empirically informed tailored interventions are needed, along with formal program evaluations to advance the evidence base.
Current trends in quantitative health research have highlighted the inadequacy of the usual operationalisation of sex and gender, resulting in a growing demand for more nuanced options. This scoping review provides an overview of recent instruments for the operationalisation of sex and gender in health-related research beyond a concept of mutually exclusive binary categories as male or masculine vs. female or feminine. Our search in three databases (Medline, Scopus and Web of Science) returned 9935 matches, of which 170 were included. From these, we identified 77 different instruments. The number and variety of instruments measuring sex and/or gender in quantitative health-related research increased over time. Most of these instruments were developed with a US-American student population. The majority of instruments focused on the assessment of gender based on a binary understanding, while sex or combinations of sex and gender were less frequently measured. Different populations may require the application of different instruments, and various research questions may ask for different dimensions of sex and gender to be studied. Despite the clear interest in the development of novel sex and/or gender instruments, future research needs to focus on new ways of operationalisation that account for their variability and multiple dimensions.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.