Table 5 |
||||||
|
Comparison of proposals with expressed intention to consider sex differences between the programmes Prevention and Innovation; overall, per study type and adjusted for study type. |
||||||
| Proposals expressing intention to consider sex differences |
Difference between programmes |
|||||
| Prevention (N = 104) |
Innovation (N = 109) |
Absolute |
95% CI+ |
|||
| % |
N |
% |
N |
% |
||
|
|
||||||
| Overall (F) |
23% |
24/104 |
10% |
11/109 |
13.0 |
3.1–22.9* |
| Study type/difference corrected (F) |
||||||
| basic |
43% |
3/7 |
10% |
9/94 |
33.3 |
-3.9–70.4 |
| applied |
23% |
18/77 |
9% |
1/11 |
14.3 |
-5.2–33.7 |
| implementation |
12% |
2/16 |
0 |
0 |
- |
- |
| classification unclear |
25% |
1/4 |
25% |
1/4 |
0++ |
-60.0–60.0 |
| Overall, adjusted for study type (M) |
22/88 |
11/109 |
19.5 |
1.4–37.6* |
||
|
|
||||||
|
+ CI: Confidence interval (F) 2-sided Fisher Exact test (M) Mantel-Haenszel test. Study type 'implementation' is excluded from the stratified analysis because the type is not represented in the program Innovation. * significant (p ≤ 0.05) |
||||||
|
Keuken et al. International Journal for Equity in Health 2007 6:13 doi:10.1186/1475-9276-6-13 |
||||||
