6,468
Views
11
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review Article

Men’s health in the United States: a national health paradox

ORCID Icon
Pages 42-52 | Received 15 Jun 2019, Accepted 15 Jul 2019, Published online: 29 Jul 2019

Abstract

A health paradox exists in the United States. Men have worse health outcomes than women, but national offices exist for promoting women's but not men's health. Two factors that might contribute to this paradox are: underappreciation for the number of health issues that affect men more than women and unawareness that men’s health receives less attention than women’s health. Therefore, the aim of this article was to summarize the data related to these two factors. First, using mostly government data, an inventory of health issues that are more common in males than females was generated, with prevalence rates listed. Second, results from two new scientometric analyses are presented: (a) number of times “men’s health” and “women’s health” appeared in titles or abstracts of papers in PubMed from 1970 to 2018; and (b) number of journals currently indexed in MEDLINE that specialize in men’s or women’s health. The epidemiological data illustrate numerous health issues are more prevalent in men than women, and scientometric data reveal men’s health has been given less attention as a distinct field of biomedical research than women’s health. This information can help to educate legislators, health officials, journalists, and the general public about the current paradox surrounding men’s health in the United States.

Introduction

In 1990, the National Institutes of Health created the Office for Research on Women’s Health (ORWH) in response to the claim women were inadequately represented in biomedical research trials. Multiple sources later confirmed this claim was unsubstantiated [Citation1,Citation2], yet the ORWH still operates and no equivalent office for men’s health has ever been created. Moreover, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and The Food and Drug Administration have offices dedicated to the study and promotion of women’s health. Neither agency has an office for men’s health ().

Table 1. List of men’s and women’s offices in national health agencies within the United States government.

The absence of national offices dedicated to men’s health is perplexing and paradoxical given that men, on average, have worse health outcomes than women. For example, life expectancy for males in the United States is 4.8 years less than that for females [Citation3]. Notably, this difference is greater than the life expectancy difference between Blacks and Whites (3.4 years) [Citation3]—a statistic which additional offices have been created to address (e.g. NIH Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities Research; NIH Office on Minority Health Research Coordination; CDC Office of Minority Health and Health Equity).

One factor that might contribute to the lack of advancement on men’s health issues in the United States is a general underappreciation for the number of issues that affect men more than women. Recognition of these issues might be enhanced if the relevant epidemiological data were collated into one source, something that has rarely been done. Another factor that might underlie the lack of progress on men’s health issues in the United States is that few attempts have been made to quantify the different amounts of attention given to the fields of men’s and women’s health. The greater number of national offices dedicated to women’s health than men’s health lends initial support to this (), as does data showing the number of women’s health centers in the United States far exceeds the number of men’s health centers [Citation4]. Different degrees of attention to men’s and women’s health may also manifest in differences in the amount of scholarly output published under the purviews of “men’s health” and “women’s health.”

Therefore, this article had two aims. The first was to summarize the health issues that are prevalent in males than in females. In most cases, data from the CDC and other agencies within the United States government were reported. The second aim was to examine the different levels of recognition given to the concepts of men’s health and women’s health over the past 50 years. This was done by first quantifying the number of times the terms “men’s health” and “women’s health” have appeared in the titles or abstracts of papers in PubMed from 1970 to 2018. Then, a list of journals currently indexed in MEDLINE and specializing in either men’s health or women’s health was generated. Together, the epidemiological data from the first aim and the scientometric data from the second aim can be used to educate legislators, health officials, journalists, and the general public about the current paradox surrounding men’s health in the United States.

Health issues that are more prevalent in males than females

lists and describes the substantial number of health and health-related issues that are more prevalent in males than in females. Examples include life expectancy, accidental injuries and deaths, cardiovascular disease, sexually transmitted diseases (HIV, syphilis), most types of cancer, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, amputations, gout, kidney stones, inguinal hernia, sleep-disordered breathing, hearing loss, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, antisocial personality disorder, autism spectrum disorder, communication disorders, conduct disorder, Tourette syndrome, educational attainment, pathological gambling, substance abuse (alcohol, tobacco, cocaine, hallucinogens, heroin, opioids), criminal activity and bullying (perpetrator and victim), imprisonment, homelessness, and suicide.

Table 2. Health issues (A–Z) that are more prevalent in males than in females in the United States.Table Footnotea

Notably, has two large omissions. First, outcomes specific to the male reproductive system are not reported (e.g. prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction). Second, outcomes in which prevalence rates are similar between males and females are also not reported. Both sets of outcomes affect millions of males and provide further rationale for more attention to men’s health issues. Nevertheless, the goal of was to represent only those health behaviors and outcomes that are biologically possible for both sexes and are noticeably worse in males.

Attention given to men’s health as a distinct area of biomedical research

illustrates the number of times the terms “men’s health” and “women’s health” appeared in the titles or abstracts of papers in PubMed from 1970 to 2018. The term “men’s health” has been used 1555 times over that 48-year period, whereas the term “women’s health” has been used 14,501 times (nearly a 10-fold difference). From the figure, it is also evident that “women’s health” was conceptualized as a field of research and practice much earlier than “men’s health.” In 2018, the term “men’s health” was used 199 times. The term “women’s health” had already exceeded 200 uses in a single year by 1993, roughly the same time the national offices on women’s health were established.

Figure 1. The number of times the terms “men’s health” and “women’s health” appeared in the titles or abstracts of papers in PubMed from 1970 to 2018. The search was performed by typing “men’s health” [TIAB] into the PubMed search field. The same search was performed for “women’s health.” The count for “men’s health” in a given year is illustrated by the white bar. The count for “women’s health” during a given year is the black bar plus the white bar (e.g. the term “women’s health” appeared in the titles or abstracts of 1090 papers in 2018). These data reflect the degree to which men’s health and women’s health have been conceptualized as distinct areas of inquiry. This is not to say men’s health has not been considered in other ways; for example, journals on substance abuse might have a heightened focus on men. Nevertheless, this does not deter from the fact that men’s health, as an abstract concept, has not been recognized and promoted in the same way as women’s health.

Figure 1. The number of times the terms “men’s health” and “women’s health” appeared in the titles or abstracts of papers in PubMed from 1970 to 2018. The search was performed by typing “men’s health” [TIAB] into the PubMed search field. The same search was performed for “women’s health.” The count for “men’s health” in a given year is illustrated by the white bar. The count for “women’s health” during a given year is the black bar plus the white bar (e.g. the term “women’s health” appeared in the titles or abstracts of 1090 papers in 2018). These data reflect the degree to which men’s health and women’s health have been conceptualized as distinct areas of inquiry. This is not to say men’s health has not been considered in other ways; for example, journals on substance abuse might have a heightened focus on men. Nevertheless, this does not deter from the fact that men’s health, as an abstract concept, has not been recognized and promoted in the same way as women’s health.

lists the journals currently indexed in MEDLINE and dedicated to either men’s or women’s health issues. A total of 6 journals were identified as dedicated to men’s health issues, whereas a total of 62 journals were identified as dedicated to women’s health issues. Notably, if journals dedicated to obstetrics and genecology are removed from the list, the number of journals dedicated to women’s health issues still exceeds the number dedicated to men’s health issues. Another interesting observation from is that there are five journals dedicated to breast disease and cancer and one dedicated to prostate disease and cancer, even though death rates from breast cancer (20.7 per 100,000 persons) and prostate cancer (19.2 per 100,000 persons) are similar [Citation19].

Table 3. List of journals that focus on men’s health and women’s health and are currently indexed in MEDLINE.

Discussion

In this article, two types of data were presented and summarized. The first were epidemiological data, illustrating the large number of health issues that are more prevalent in males than females. The second were scientometric data, confirming men’s health does not have widespread recognition as a distinct field in biomedical research. The potential for a causal relationship between the lack of recognition of men’s health as a distinct field of research and practice, and the relatively poor health outcomes in males, should be considered in future work and discussions.

Women’s health

The frequent use of the term “women’s health” in biomedical research () and the large number of journals dedicated to studying women’s health () are further evidence that women’s health has been given a good deal of attention over the past 50 years [Citation1,Citation2]. Such evidence contradicts the notion women have been discriminated against in health research. In fact, the scientometrics in and illustrate women’s health, as a distinct field, has received more attention than men’s health. Moreover, this finding is consistent with the finding that in clinical practice, there are more opportunities for females to seek specialized care than there are for males. Of the top 50 urology hospitals in the United States, 49 (98%) have a women’s health center, whereas 16 (32%) have a men’s health center [Citation4].

There are health issues that are more prevalent in women than men (e.g. eating disorders). Those issues deserve of attention. However, this article is not the place to discuss these issues. Multiple offices in national health agencies already exist for the purpose of increasing awareness of women’s health issues.

Men’s health

Progress on men’s health issues in the United States has been slow compared to other developed countries, where reports on men’s health issues have been generated [Citation73–80]. A similar report will likely be necessary to increase awareness of men’s health issues in the United States. Given the current academic climate focused on “health disparities” and “health inequalities,” it is perplexing that men’s health has not garnered more attention. In fact, discussions on “gender equity” in health tend to focus almost exclusively on women [Citation81,Citation82]. Moreover, notions of “patriarchy” and “male privilege” are rampant in the media and in academic journals. These concepts, and the ethos surrounding them, are not only misguided, but they are likely detrimental to the health of men. They direct attention away from men’s health issues, and as generalizations, they do not accurately reflect the lives of many males. For example, what power does a homeless man hold? What aspects of performing manual labor or collecting garbage are privilege? Moreover, readers should consider how the health issues that are more prevalent in men would be recognized differently if they were more prevalent in women. For example, how many additional national offices or action plans would be created if a study found women were the sex more likely to commit suicide, be homeless, or abuse alcohol?

Finally, if one day evidence arises that men are more frequently represented in research trials than women, this does necessitate a conclusion of discrimination. It might simply reflect the differences in health conditions between the sexes. Given that health outcomes are not equal between men and women, it seems odd that representation is equal.

Conclusion

The epidemiological data summarized in this article illustrate that men have worse health outcomes than women, and the scientometric data reveal men’s health has been given less attention as a distinct field of biomedical research than women’s health. These data should be considered within the appropriate historical context. For the past 25–30 years, national offices have been studying and promoting women’s health issues; yet, over this time, men have been the sex exhibiting the worse health outcomes. This paradox should be acknowledged, and men’s health in the United States should be given more attention. Both men and women will benefit from efforts to improve health outcomes in boys and men.

Disclosure statement

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  • Mastroianni AC, Faden R, Federman D. Woman and health research: ethical and legal issues of including women in clinical studies. Vol. I. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1994.
  • Satel SL. There is no women's health crisis. Public Interest. 1998;130:21–33.
  • Arias E, Xu J. United States life tables, 2015. Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2018;67(7):1–64.
  • Choy J, Kashanian JA, Sharma V, et al. The men's health center: disparities in gender specific health services among the top 50 “best hospitals” in America. Asian J Urol. 2015;2:170–174.
  • US Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic safety facts – 2015 data (DOT HS 812 382). 2017.
  • Heron M. Deaths: leading causes for 2016. Natl Vit Stat Rep. 2018;67(6):1–77.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Drowning – United States, 2005–2009. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2012;61:344–347.
  • US Department of Labor – Bureau of Labor Statistics. National census of fatal occupational injuries in 2017 (USDL-18-1978). 2018.
  • Sheu Y, Chen LH, Hedegaard H. Sports- and recreation-related injury episodes in the United States, 2011–2014. Natl Health Stat Rep. 2016;99:1–12.
  • Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:422–429.
  • Mehta P, Kaye W, Raymond J, et al. Prevalence of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis – United States, 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67:216–218.
  • Gan DC, Sinclair RD. Prevalence of male and female pattern hair loss in Maryborough. J Investig Dermatol Symp Proc. 2005;10:184–189.
  • Salman KE, Altunay IK, Kucukunal NA, et al. Frequency, severity and related factors of androgenetic alopecia in dermatology outpatient clinic: hospital-based cross-sectional study in Turkey. An Bras Dermatol. 2017;92:35–40.
  • Compton WM, Conway KP, Stinson FS, et al. Prevalence, correlates, and comorbidity of DSM-IV antisocial personality syndromes and alcohol and specific drug use disorders in the United States: results from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66:677–685.
  • Zahran HS, Bailey CM, Damon SA, et al. Vital signs: asthma in children – United States, 2001–2016. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67:149–155.
  • Willcutt EG. The prevalence of DSM-IV attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analytic review. Neurotherapeutics. 2012;9:490–499.
  • Baio J, Wiggins L, Christensen DL, et al. Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years – autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2014. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018;67(6):1–23.
  • Nansel TR, Overpeck M, Pilla RS, et al. Bullying behaviors among US youth: prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. JAMA. 2001;285:2094–2100.
  • Singh SD, Henley SJ, Ryerson AB. Surveillance for cancer incidence and mortality – United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017;66:1–36.
  • Cronin KA, Lake AJ, Scott S, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part I: national cancer statistics. Cancer. 2018;124:2785–2800.
  • Benjamin EJ, Blaha MJ, Chiuve SE, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2017 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2017;135:e146–e603.
  • Gilboa SM, Salemi JL, Nembhard WN, et al. Mortality resulting from congenital heart disease among children and adults in the United States, 1999 to 2006. Circulation. 2010;122:2254–2263.
  • Harmon KG, Drezner JA, Wilson MG, et al. Incidence of sudden cardiac death in athletes: a state-of-the-art review. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48:1185–1192.
  • Christensen D, Van Naarden Braun K, Doernberg NS, et al. Prevalence of cerebral palsy, co-occurring autism spectrum disorders, and motor functioning – Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, USA, 2008. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2014;56:59–65.
  • Black LI, Vahratian A, Hoffman HJ. Communication disorders and use of intervention services among children aged 3–17 years: United States, 2012. NCHS Data Brief. 2015;205:1–8.
  • Morris MA, Meier SK, Griffin JM, et al. Prevalence and etiologies of adult communication disabilities in the United States: results from the 2012 National Health Interview Survey. Disabil Health J. 2016;9:140–144.
  • Shriberg LD, Tomblin JB, McSweeny JL. Prevalence of speech delay in 6-year-old children and comorbidity with language impairment. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1999;42:1461–1481.
  • Nock MK, Kazdin AE, Hiripi E, et al. Prevalence, subtypes, and correlates of DSM-IV conduct disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Psychol Med. 2006;36:699–710.
  • U.S. Department of Justice – Federal Bureau of Investigation. Crime in the United States, 2017. 2018.
  • Glaze LE, Kaeble D. Correctional populations in the United States, 2013 (NCJ 248479). 2014.
  • Grant BF, Goldstein RB, Saha TD, et al. Epidemiology of DSM-5 alcohol use disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions III. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:757–766.
  • Kanny D, Brewer RD, Mesnick JB, et al. Vitals signs: alcohol poisoning deaths – United States, 2010–2012. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;63:1238–1242.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Vital signs: alcohol-impaired driving among adults – United States, 2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011;60:1351–1356.
  • Pope HG, Jr Kanayama G, Athey A, et al. The lifetime prevalence of anabolic-androgenic steroid use and dependence in Americans: current best estimates. Am J Addict. 2014;23:371–374.
  • Kerridge BT, Chou SP, Pickering RP, et al. Changes in the prevalence and correlates of cocaine use and cocaine use disorder in the United States, 2001-2002 and 2012-2013. Addict Behav. 2019;90:250–257.
  • Shalit N, Rehm J, Lev-Ran S. Epidemiology of hallucinogen use in the U.S. results from the National epidemiologic survey on alcohol and related conditions III. Addict Behav. 2019;89:35–43.
  • Martins SS, Sarvet A, Santaella-Tenorio J, et al. Changes in US lifetime heroin use and heroin use disorder: prevalence from the 2001–2002 to 2012–2013 National Epidemiologic Survey on alcohol and related conditions. JAMA Psychiatry. 2017;74:445–455.
  • Grant BF, Saha TD, Ruan WJ, et al. Epidemiology of DSM-5 drug use disorder: results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions-III. JAMA Psychiatry. 2016;73:39–47.
  • Hasin DS, Saha TD, Kerridge BT, et al. Prevalence of marijuana use disorders in the United States between 2001–2002 and 2012–2013. JAMA Psychiatry. 2015;72:1235–1242.
  • Saha TD, Kerridge BT, Goldstein RB, et al. Nonmedical prescription opioid use and DSM-5 nonmedical prescription opioid use disorder in the United States. J Clin Psychiatry. 2016;77:772–780.
  • Wang TW, Asman K, Gentzke AS, et al. Tobacco product use among adults – United States, 2017. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2018;67:1225–1232.
  • Henley SJ, Thomas CC, Sharapova SR, et al. Vital signs: disparities in tobacco-related cancer incidence and mortality – United States, 2004-2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2016;65:1212–1218.
  • Snyder TD, de Brey C, Dillow SA. In: National Center for Education Statistics IoES, editor. Digest of education statistics 2016 (NCES 2017-094). 52nd ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; 2018.
  • McFarland J, Chui J, Stark P, et al. Trends in high school dropout and completion rates in the United States: 2014 (NCES 2018-117). Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; 2018.
  • Ryan CL, Bauman K. U S. Department of Commerce – Census Bureau. Education Attainment in the United States: 2015. 2016.
  • Work experience of the population – 2014 (USDL-15-2330) [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2019 Feb 28]. Available from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/work_12092015.htm
  • Work experience of the population – 2017 (USDL-18-1942) [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2019 Feb 28]. Available from: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/work.nr0.htm
  • Welte JW, Barnes GM, Tidwell MO, et al. Gambling and problem gambling in the United States: changes between 1999 and 2013. J Gambl Stud. 2015;31:695–715.
  • Zucker KJ. Epidemiology of gender dysphoria and transgender identity. Sex Health. 2017;14:404–411.
  • Crissman HP, Berger MB, Graham LF, et al. Transgender demographics: a household probability sample of US adults, 2014. Am J Public Health. 2017;107:213–215.
  • Chen-Xu M, Yokose C, Rai SK, et al. Contemporary prevalence of gout and hyperuricemia in the United States and decadal trends: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007–2016. Arthritis Rheumatol. 2019;71:991–999.
  • Hoffman HJ, Dobie RA, Losonczy KG, et al. Declining prevalence of hearing loss in US adults aged 20 to 60 years. Jama Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017;143:274–285.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Monitoring selected national HIV prevention and care objectives by using HIV surveillance data – United States and 6 dependent areas – 2011. 2013.
  • Harry M, Watt R, Rosenthal L, et al. The 2017 Annual Homeless Assesment Report (AHAR) to Congress. 2017.
  • Ruhl CE, Everhart JE. Risk factors for inguinal hernia among adults in the US population. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;165:1154–1161.
  • Scales CD, Jr. Smith A, Hanley JM, et al. Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States. Eur Urol. 2012;62:160–165.
  • Wang H, Dwyer-Lindgren L, Lofgren KT, et al. Age-specific and sex-specific mortality in 187 countries, 1970–2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380:2071–2094.
  • Kaplan RM, Kronick RG. Marital status and longevity in the United States population. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2006;60:760–765.
  • Roelfs DJ, Shor E, Kalish R, et al. The rising relative risk of mortality for singles: meta-analysis and meta-regression. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174:379–389.
  • Kreider RM, Ellis R. U.S. Census Bureau. Number, timing, and duration of marriages and divorces: 2009. 2011.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy among males aged 5–24 years – four states, 2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58:1119–1122.
  • Romitti PA, Zhu Y, Puzhankara S, et al. Prevalence of Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophies in the United States. Pediatrics. 2015;135:513–521.
  • Taylor KS, Cook JA, Counsell CE. Heterogeneity in male to female risk for Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007;78:905–906.
  • Young T, Palta M, Dempsey J, et al. The occurrence of sleep-disordered breathing among middle-aged adults. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1230–1235.
  • Young T, Blustein J, Finn L, et al. Sleep-disordered breathing and motor vehicle accidents in a population-based sampel of employed adults. Sleep. 1997;20:608–613.
  • Jain NB, Ayers GD, Peterson EN, et al. Traumatic spinal cord injury in the United States, 1993–2012. JAMA. 2015;313:2236–2243.
  • Naghavi M. Global Burden of Disease Self-Harm Collaborators. Global, regional, and national burden of suicide mortality 1990 to 2016: systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. BMJ. 2019;364:194.
  • Jack SPD, Petrosky E, Lyons BH, et al. Surveillance for violent deaths – National Violent Death Reporting System, 27 states, 2015. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2018;67(11):1.
  • Patton ME, Su JR, Nelson R, et al. Primary and secondary syphilis-United States, 2005–2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;63:402–406.
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Prevalence of diagnosed Tourette syndrome in persons aged 6–17 years – United States, 2007. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009;58:581–585.
  • Coronado VG, Xu L, Basavaraju SV, et al. Surveillance for traumatic brain injury-related deaths – United States, 1997–2007. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2011;60:1–32.
  • Sandman D, Simantov E, An C. Out of touch: American men and the health care system. New York: The Commonwealth Fund; 2000.
  • Australian Government Department of Health Ageing. National male health policy: building on the strength of Australian males 2010.
  • Department of Health and Children. National Men’s Health Policy 2008–2013. 2008.
  • European Men’s Health Forum. Men’s health around the world: a review of policy and progress across 11 countries. J Mens Health. 2009. 6:372.
  • Ng CJ, Teo CH, Ho CC, et al. The status of men's health in Asia. Prev Med. 2014;67:295–302.
  • Ng CJ, Teo CH, Ho CCK, et al. Science and society: development of the Asian Men's Health Report: challenges and opportunities. Nat Rev Urol. 2017;14:630–636.
  • Richardson N, Smith JA. National men’s health policies in Ireland and Australia: what are the challenges associated with transitioning from development to implementation. Public Health. 2011;125:424–432.
  • Teo CH, Ng CJ, Ho CC, et al. A consensus on men's health status and policy in Asia: a Delphi survey. Public Health. 2015;129:60–67.
  • World Health Organization – Regional Office for Europe. The health and well-being of men in the WHO European Region: better health through a gender approach. 2018.
  • Bates LM, Hankivsky O, Springer KW. Gender and health inequities: a comment on the Final Report of the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health. Soc Sci Med. 2009;69:1002–1004.
  • Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on social determinants of health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2008.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.