Aims: To follow up on exchange students' alcohol use, drug use, mental health, self-rated health, and risky sexual behaviour after a semester abroad and to compare them with students who remained on campus. Methods: The study design was a follow-up study based on a previous baseline survey of 114 prospective exchange students and 451 campus students. Of the original 565 students, 48 (42.1%) prospective exchange students and 209 (43.3%) campus students responded to the follow-up. Both the baseline survey and the follow-up survey included the General Health Questionnaire 12, one single item from Self-Rated Health, and nine items from Knowledge, Attitudes and Sexual Behaviour in Young People in Sweden. Results: We found a statistically significant increase in the weekly consumption of alcohol among exchange students after their semester abroad. A larger proportion of exchange students had sex with a new partner and sex with more than three partners during their semester abroad compared to follow-up campus students. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that exchange students consume alcohol more frequently during their semester abroad and indulge in sexually risky behaviour. Exchange students' use of alcohol and sexually risky behaviour could be associated with even greater risks due to them being in an unknown environment, unfamiliar culture, and with limited support from family and friends. This highlights the need for further research on exchange students' experiences, especially concerning alcohol use and sex while abroad.

Till skillnad från många andra tillstånd som behandlas inom vården är våldets hälsokonsekvenser orsakade av en förövare. Patienten är därmed inte bara patient, utan även ett brottsoffer. Vilka etiska krav ställer det på forskning och undervisning om våld? Frågan knyter an till förändringen av examinationsordningen för bland annat sjuksköterskeutbildningen som gjordes 2017. Artikeln tar avstamp i examensmålets bakgrund i jämställdhetspolitiken. Därefter följer reflektioner om etik i våldsundervisningen, och om det spänningsfält som uppstår när olika ämnens perspektiv gör anspråk på tolkningsföreträde till hur våld ska förstås.

Why do eye clinics differ in their waiting times for women's and men's access to cataract extraction (CE)/gra starroperation? Taking a doing-gender perspective as the starting point, this study explores how gender constructions embedded in Swedish eye clinics contribute to longer waiting times for women than for men. Focus group interviews were conducted with doctors at two Swedish eye clinics: one with a larger and another with a smaller than average gender difference in waiting times for CE. Several differences were found between the clinics regarding how gender was constructed: Women and men were constructed as different with respect to ascribed traits such as assertiveness and care-seeking behaviour. Their need for visual acuity in working life was perceived as different by the doctors, and the study indicates differences between the clinics regarding their interest and awareness concerning issues related to inequity, reflected in the dissimilar prevalence of jokes with racist and misogynist connotations at the two clinics.

This article compares knowledge claims within critical realism and the situated knowledges approach, and will discuss the implications of adopting these two perspectives in research on inequity in health care. The concept of medical gender bias, as well as two empirical studies on inequity among patients waiting for cataract extractions in Sweden, will be used in order to illustrate the different implications of adopting a critical realist or a situated knowledges perspective. The article suggests that the latter of these two perspectives is compatible with critical realist claims about epistemic relativism, but that it is much harder to combine with the concept of judgmental rationality, at least in so far as this rationality is not treated as being situated itself. The article will also claim that critical realism and the situated knowledges approach emphasize different implications concerning responsibility during processes of knowledge production. Finally, it will suggest that the adoption of a critical realist-based intersectional ontology, in combination with a greater emphasis on the fact that researchers are always situated in various ways, is a fruitful starting point for grounding studies on inequity in health care.

Aim: The aim was to examine waiting times for cataract extraction in Sweden from an intersectional gender perspective; quantitative with regard to waiting times for different patient groups, and qualitative in order to identify factors that might contribute to gender differences in waiting time. Furthermore, the aim was to examine implications of critical realism and situated knowledges for studies of gender differences among patients regarding access to cataract extraction and more generally as grounds for studies of (in)equity in care.

Methods: Studies I and II were register studies, and linear regression was performed in Study I and logistic regression in Study II. Mean waiting times for female and male patients were calculated in both studies. In Study III, focus group interviews were conducted at two eye clinics with differences in gender-related waiting times. The analysis method used was constructivist grounded theory, and text analyses were performed in Study IV.

Main findings: Longer waiting times were associated with patients who were female, retired, of higher age, born outside the Nordic countries, having lower income, lacking education at university level and not being categorized by means of NIKE. Female patients had longer waiting time in all categories.

The following factors might contribute to why female patients have longer waiting times: Traditional male occupations were constructed as being more demanding for visual acuity, while the need for good visual acuity in women’s work life was questioned; Assertive behaviour among men was explained in legitimizing ways; Behaviour among men with poor vision was constructed as safety risks in relation to driving and hunting. Concerning meta-theoretical aspects, both critical realism and situated knowledges can be fruitful for studies of (in)equity in care but are to some degree incompatible with each other.

Conclusions: Differences in waiting times at eye clinics can be related to gender constructions. The prevailing pattern of female cataract patients systematically having longer waiting time than male patients that emerges in this thesis is noteworthy in relation to the principle of equity in care. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that waiting times were related to age, retirement, and native country as well as income and education levels.

Background: Swedish Health and Medical Services act states that good care should be given to the entire population on equal terms. Still studies show that access to care in Sweden differ related to for example gender and socioeconomic variables. One of the areas in Swedish health care that has attracted attention for potential inequity in access is Cataract Extraction (CE). Previous studies of access to CE in Sweden show that female patients have in general poorer vision before they are operated and longer waiting times for CE than male patients. The aim of the study was to describe the waiting times in different patient groups with regards to visual acuity, gender, age, native country, educational level, annual income and whether the patient was retired or still working. Methods: The study was designed as a register study of 102 532 patients who have had CE performed in Sweden 2010-2011. Linear regression was used to analyse the association between patient characteristics and waiting times. Mean waiting times for women and men were calculated for all groups. Results: At significance level p < 0.05 longer waiting times corresponded to patients having good visual acuity, being of female gender, high age, retired, born outside the Nordic countries and having low income and education. Calculations of mean waiting times for all groups showed that women had longer waiting times than men. Conclusions: The differences between groups defined, for example, by gender, age, native country, income, education and retirement are statistically significant. We do not consider them as clinically significant, but we consider the consistent pattern that we have found noteworthy in relation to the principle of equity in health care.

Purpose:  The purpose of this study was to investigate national indication criteria tool for cataract extraction (NIKE), a clinical tool for establishing levels of indications for cataract surgery, in relation to gender differences in waiting times for cataract extraction (CE).

Methods:  Data were collected by The Swedish National Cataract Register (NCR). Eye clinics report to NCR voluntarily and on regular basis (98% coverage). Comparisons regarding gender difference in waiting times were performed between NIKE-categorized and non-NIKE-categorized patients, as well as between different indication groups within the NIKE-system. All calculations were performed in spssversion 20. Multivariate analyses were carried out using logistic regression, and single variable analyses were carried out by Student’s t-test or chi square as appropriate.

Results:  Gender, age, visual acuity and NIKE-categorization were associated with waiting time. Female patients had a longer waiting time to CE than male, both within and outside the NIKE-system. Gender difference in waiting time was somewhat larger among patients who had not been categorized by NIKE. In the non-NIKE-categorized group, women waited 0.20 months longer than men. In the group which was NIKE-categorized, women waited 0.18 months longer than men.

Conclusions:  It is reasonable to assume that prioritizing patients by means of NIKE helps to reduce the gender differences in waiting time. Gender differences in waiting time have decreased as NIKE was introduced and there may be a variety of explanations for this. However, with the chosen study design, we could not distinguish between effects related to NIKE and those due to other factors which occurred during the study period.