Strengthening Women's Access to Aid Through Research

Gender is a fundamental social determinant that shapes health systems, influencing access, decision-making, and resource allocation. However, global health research has historically overlooked gender dynamics, leading to gaps in policy and practice. This document provides a structured approach to gender analysis, equipping researchers with tools to examine how gender power relations affect health outcomes. By integrating sex-disaggregated data, gender frameworks, and analytical questions, it ensures that research captures the full spectrum of inequalities, offering deeper insights into how gender intersects with factors like class, ethnicity, and disability. The document highlights practical applications of gender analysis, addressing key areas such as health workforce disparities, gendered labor divisions, and policy gaps. It explores how gendered norms influence healthcare roles, why women remain overrepresented in lower-paid positions, and how systemic barriers limit their leadership opportunities. It also emphasizes the role of data collection, stressing the importance of who collects and analyzes data, when and where it is gathered, and how biases influence findings. This structured approach helps ensure research findings translate into evidence-based policies that drive gender-equitable health reforms. For M&E professionals and humanitarian researchers, this guide is an indispensable tool for strengthening gender-responsive programming. It underscores the ethical responsibility of research to do no gender harm while also advocating for transformative approaches that challenge harmful norms. Whether conducting health system assessments, designing interventions, or shaping policy recommendations, the insights provided empower practitioners to integrate gender as a core analytical lens, leading to more effective, inclusive, and impactful research.

India now spends ₹2 trillion/year (0.6% of GDP) on cash transfers to 130M+ women—yet we know little about their effects. In a new paper, we present findings from the first large-scale randomized-controlled trial (RCT) of maternal cash transfers in India. The intervention: ₹500/month (~10% of HH consumption) for 2 years to ~1,200 new mothers across 8 Jharkhand districts; given unconditionally, but labeled as support for nutritious food. We tracked food, nutrition, and child development over 3 years. We find that food consumption rose significantly: household food spending up >11%; calorie intake up 9% (Y1) and 14% (Y2) for mothers and children; protein and iron intake also improved. Dietary diversity gains persisted 18 months after the transfers ended. We find substantial improvements in intra-household equity: in Y2, maternal calorie intake rose ~3x more than the household average, helping narrow pre-existing gender gaps in nutrition. Measures of empowerment (e.g., health-seeking behavior for children) also increased. Despite better diets, we do not find average gains in standard anthropometric outcomes (WAZ/HAZ) for targeted children. However, we do find some evidence of gains in areas with better sanitation, consistent with sanitation mediating nutrition-to-growth translation. Older siblings (not directly targeted) saw gains: sibling WAZ scores rose by 0.11–0.13σ, with no heterogeneity by sanitation. Thus, cash transfers benefited other children too, but the mediating role of sanitation in nutrition-to-growth translation may be greater for infants. Child functional development improved. We find a 0.12σ gain in ASQ-3 scores at age 3 — including cognition, and both gross and fine motor skills. These effects may matter even more than physical growth over time as labor markets reward ‘brains’ more than ‘brawn’. Increased food spending from cash transfers to women was at par with in-kind PDS transfers (similar marginal propensity to consume or MPC on food). Thus, cash versus kind debates may be second order when the value of cash transfers is less than what HH are spending on the in-kind item anyway. Overall, we find: a) Positive impacts on food intake, nutrition, and gender equity b) Meaningful gains in child functional development c) Limited average anthropometric gains, mediated by sanitation (highlighting need to pair nutrition efforts with sanitation investments) These positive effects contrast with recent U.S. evidence: Noble et al. (2025) found no developmental gains from large 4-year transfers. Context matters—underscoring the importance of testing in relevant settings. Full paper at: https://bit.ly/4mE6EtW Paul Niehaus Sandip Sukhtankar Jeff Weaver UC San Diego J-PAL South Asia

In Canada, women spend about 24% more time in poor health—roughly 14 years lived with disability compared to 11 years for men—and this creates both a major personal burden and a large economic drag. By 2040, closing this gap could give each Canadian woman about seven more healthy days per year, and boost Canada’s economy by approximately $37 billion annually. The latest McKinsey & Company's study identifies core drivers of this gap: 📌 an efficacy gap, where treatments and clinical research are less tailored or less effective for women (for example, cardiovascular or cancer treatments validated primarily in men 📌 a care-delivery gap, where women—especially in rural, Indigenous, racialized or low-income groups—get delayed, fragmented or lower-quality care 📌 a data gap, where women’s health conditions are under-measured and sex/gender-disaggregated data is lacking. The study stresses that Canada, despite its strong health system and resources, ranks poorly among major economies for the women’s-health‐related economic gap, so the potential upside is both large and achievable. To realise this opportunity, it outlines a multi-stakeholder call to action: governments, health systems, research institutions, businesses and investors need to invest in women-centric research and innovation, improve sex- and gender-disaggregated data collection, tailor care delivery to women’s needs, and integrate women’s health more fully into workplace and policy frameworks. It highlights that this isn’t just about reproductive health—many of the high-impact conditions are things like cardiovascular disease, migraines, menopause and mental health—so addressing them can strengthen workforce participation, productivity and national economic growth. Find out more via link 🔗 https://lnkd.in/eCippyuA #womenshealth #healthcaregap #femtech #innovation #healthcareresearch #healthcareinnovation #healthcareinvestment

When crisis strikes, women don’t wait. They lead. It’s time we fund them. From Haiti to Gaza to Sudan, women-led organisations (WLOs) are among the first, and often the only responders when formal systems collapse. Yet two new ODI Global reports by Megan Daigle and team "How Women Lead" and "Breaking Down the Barriers to Women-Led Responses Amidst the Humanitarian Reset" reveal a stark truth: the humanitarian system is still not built to trust, fund, or follow women’s leadership. Here's what the evidence tells us: 1. Women-led organisations are trusted first responders. They’re embedded in communities, working from crisis to devevlopment, from protection and food security to governance and peacebuilding. They do it all! 2. But they remain underfunded and sidelined. Most receive little to no direct funding. Humanitarian coordination spaces still exclude them from decision-making. 3. A “humanitarian reset” is being discussed but not yet felt. Many WLOs face shrinking funds, bureaucratic hurdles, and token inclusion while rhetoric on localisation grows louder. 4. Intersectional women’s leadership is especially invisible. Groups led by or serving older women, women with disabilities, or LBT women face even higher barriers to access funding and participation. So, what do we do? 1. Fund women-led organisations directly, with flexible, multi-year, core funding that builds institutional strength. 2. Simplify access, slash the bureaucratic red tape that keeps WLOs out of humanitarian financing systems. 3. Make localisation feminist, shift power, not just partnerships. 4. Include intersectional leadership, amplify those furthest from power, closest to the crisis. 5. Hold the system accountable, including meeting the UN’s 15% funding target for gender equality. This isn’t just about inclusion, equality or respect. It’s also about survival and more effective and efficicent humanitarian action for longer term impacts. #Fundwomen #investinwomen #womensrights #womensleadership #genderequality #wps Read the reports: https://lnkd.in/g4cenNyE and https://lnkd.in/gQGZZNuh UN Trust Fund to End Violence against Women and Girls Women's Peace & Humanitarian Fund (WPHF) Equality Fund United Nations Global Fund for Women Melinda French Gates Association for Women's Rights in Development (AWID) NEAR (Network for Empowered Aid Response) The Feminist Humanitarian Network UN Women Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade The World Bank Sida European Union Goldman Sachs Pivotal Ventures

Ethical use of digital tools from telehealth to wearables and AI can shift women's health research from extractive to participatory, widening who is reached, how data are gathered, and how evidence is applied across the life course. 1️⃣ Women live longer yet spend more years in poor health; DHTs can reduce access barriers (caregiving, rurality, mobility) and support decentralized, remote research. 2️⃣ Established tools (web platforms, mHealth, telehealth) expand recruitment and informed consent, with high mobile penetration and large-scale use of cycle-tracking apps. 3️⃣ Evolving tools (wearables, connected devices) enable real-world, passive data capture and digital biomarkers that reflect day-to-day physiology and behavior. 4️⃣ AI/ML support large-scale analytics, can flag underserved subgroups, and when trained on representative datasets, help tailor interventions and reduce diagnostic blind spots. 5️⃣ Real-world menstrual data (~76k cycles) show only about 12% have a 28-day cycle, with wide variation, challenging "textbook" norms and informing counseling. 6️⃣ In a large randomized screening trial, AI-supported mammography maintained safety with similar recall and false positives and cut radiologist workload by about 44%, enabling broader coverage. 7️⃣ Emerging directions like digital twins, big AI, and federated learning aim to predict risk, personalize care (e.g., preterm birth modeling), and enable privacy-preserving, multi-site research networks. 8️⃣ Inclusivity requires confronting the digital divide (cost, connectivity, skills), strong governance, and trust; policy shifts such as post-Dobbs privacy concerns can sharply reduce app engagement. 9️⃣ Risks include biased models, non-evidence "empowerment" marketing, and tech-facilitated violence; quality, safety, and sex-disaggregated analyses remain inconsistent. 🔟 Practical moves: hybrid trials with remote options, co-design with diverse users, integration of social determinants of health data, transparent data pipelines, and a scope beyond "bikini medicine" (cardio-metabolic, neuro, bone, mental health). ✍🏻 Bola Grace, PhD, MBA, Lauren Wise, Marzena Nieroda, Jennifer Egbunike PhD, SFHEA, FRSPH, Nafisat Usman. Digital health technologies to transform women's health innovation and inclusive research. The BMJ. 2025. DOI: 10.1136/bmj-2025-085682

Have you ever conducted multi-sectoral needs assessments in #communities that are extremely hard to access and situated in insecure remote areas? Norwegian Church Aid / Kirkens Nødhjelp Somalia team recently facilitated such a study in the Hobyo, Harardheere, and Abudwak districts' hard-to-reach locations in Galmudug. These areas were formerly controlled by armed non-state actors. Although they recently had to leave the area, their impact on local communities persists, and they remain a security threat. ●→ The main challenge of this #research was navigating #trust issues between external #researchers and #community members. Involving local #youth and #training them for field research laid the groundwork for the process. This was improved by using #digital #technology for real-time information accuracy and support for #researchers. ●→ Another challenge was managing the community's high expectations for immediate #assistance. Researchers consistently clarified the study's scope to address these expectations. ●→ Social norms hinder discussions with women. In these regions, #women lack safe spaces to discuss #gender-based #violence (#GBV) and #protection issues with researchers. Even in women-only meetings, many feel uneasy discussing these topics due to fears of bringing shame to influential older women. This #challenge was addressed by engaging female field researchers who conducted confidential one-on-one conversations.  ●→ Individuals with #disabilities frequently went unnoticed within their communities. A targeted effort involving #gatekeepers was essential to connect with them directly, which was crucial for grasping their experiences and expectations. ●→ The target locations were 300 to 450km from the state capital. Engaging government representatives as informants proved difficult due to competing priorities and travel limitations. This was addressed by coordinating meetings based on their availability. Despite these obstacles, we have successfully concluded the research. The study's results strongly advocate to #donors for prompt, life-saving assistance for the most at-risk populations, particularly those residing in the #IDP camps. Additionally, it is crucial to prioritize strengthening local #humanitarian response capabilities, coordinating efforts, and protection mechanisms in the area. 24.01.25

𝐈𝐟 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧’𝐬 𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐝 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐦𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐡, 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐫𝐞 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐚𝐲 → Despite women making up 𝟓𝟏 % 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐥𝐝’𝐬 𝐩𝐨𝐩𝐮𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 and often acting as key health decision-makers, their health continues to be 𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 “𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐡𝐞” 𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐞. A 𝟐𝟎𝟐𝟓 World Economic Forum 𝐀𝐧𝐧𝐮𝐚𝐥 𝐌𝐞𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 highlighted the scale of the problem: ⤷ 𝟗 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, namely, PMS, menopause, maternal health conditions, cervical cancer, endometriosis, migraine, ischemic heart disease, breast cancer, and postpartum hemorrhage, 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐨𝐧𝐞-𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧’𝐬 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡 𝐠𝐚𝐩 𝐢𝐧 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐚, care delivery, and outcomes ⤷ Those same 9 conditions 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐞 𝟏𝟒 % 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐧’𝐬 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡 𝐛𝐮𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐧, but received less than 1 % of research funding between 2019–2023. ⤷ Women 𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐮𝐩 𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝟐𝟐 % 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐈 𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬, leaving huge blind spots in how treatments affect women. Source: https://lnkd.in/d8zjWubg Women’s health still sits in the blind spot of modern medicine. Despite women representing half the population, most clinical research, policy, and investment 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐲, leaving massive gaps in evidence, diagnosis, and care. The result? A system that consistently under-serves women, from puberty to post-menopause. These aren’t minor omissions; they translate to poorer outcomes, missed diagnoses, and trillions in lost economic potential. 𝐒𝐨, 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐝𝐨 𝐰𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐱 𝐢𝐭? → 𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐱-𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐚 – Every study, trial, and dataset must distinguish between male and female outcomes. → 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐨’𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐝 – Pregnant, lactating, and older women must be part of clinical research, not systematically excluded. → 𝐅𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 – Redirect investment into women’s conditions like endometriosis, menopause, and maternal health. → 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐚𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 – Regulators and funders should reward gender-balanced research and penalize neglect. ✨ 𝐈’𝐝 𝐥𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰: What would shift, in research, policy, and investment, if we truly saw women’s health as central to collective wellbeing, not a niche concern? 👋 I'm Dr. Michelle Frank, specializing in women's health advocacy. Connect with me to discuss how we can collaborate to overcome these societal barriers and improve autonomy in healthcare.

🌍 Putting Women First: What We Can Learn from Scaling Health Services Locally I recently got to read a new research series in Global Health: Science & Practice which explores how local governments in 13 countries worked with The Challenge Initiative (TCI) to improve access to family planning and reproductive health services — especially for women and girls. Thrilled to see the incredible women authors to the piece, including WomenLift Health North America cohort member Mariam Zameer from VillageReach! So why does this all matter? Because access to basic, respectful, and affordable health services isn’t just a health issue — it’s a women’s rights issue. Here’s what stood out to me: 💡 What This Means for Women and Girls 🔹 Local leadership leads to lasting change When city and local leaders take ownership of women’s health programs — rather than relying on outside organizations — services become more consistent and tailored to community needs. 🔹 Teen girls face real barriers — and need real solutions Too often, teenage girls are ignored, judged, or turned away when they seek reproductive health care. Programs that trained health workers to be more welcoming and respectful helped more girls get the support they need — without shame. 🔹 Quality matters as much as access It’s not just about offering services — it’s about treating women with dignity. That means clear information, real choices, and privacy during care. 🔹 Public and private clinics both have a role Women often go to pharmacies or private clinics when public hospitals are crowded or far away. Including these providers in health programs helped more women get reliable care wherever they went. 🔹 Smart budgeting helps women long-term When local governments commit funding for women’s health services — not just relying on donors — programs are more likely to last and grow. 🔹 Listening to women leads to better programs By collecting feedback from women and girls, local programs became more responsive to their actual needs — not just what planners thought they needed. 🚺 Bottom line? Women and girls deserve safe, respectful, and affordable reproductive health care — no matter where they live. This research shows that real progress happens when local leaders step up, women’s voices are heard, and services are built to last. 📘 See link in comments to read the full research on GHSP Supplement – The Challenge Initiative #WomensHealth #ReproductiveRights #GirlsMatter #HealthForAll #LocalLeadership #FamilyPlanning #WomensLeadership #LocalSolutions

🚨 BREAKING NEWS — A Historic Leap for Women’s Health in Denmark! 🇩🇰 The Danish Parliament - Folketinget has just announced an unprecedented DKK 160 million investment over the next four years to strengthen research in women’s health. A new National Center for Research in Women's Health will be established to: - Generate critical knowledge about women's health across life stages. - Improve prevention and treatment of female-specific diseases. - Deepen understanding of conditions that affect women and men differently. - Train the next generation of researchers through PhD positions. - Promote gender equality in healthcare through evidence-based care. For too long, women’s health has been underrepresented in medical research, and women spend a larger share of their lives in poor health. This landmark initiative is a bold step to change that: Minister for Higher Education and Science, Christina Egelund, says: "We need to bring women’s health into the spotlight of research. Therefore, the government is now proposing a multi-year and coordinated initiative to strengthen our understanding of women’s health and women-related diseases. There is great potential in ensuring that fewer women are prevented from participating in the workforce due to illness." Minister for the Interior and Health, Sophie Løhde, says: “We need more knowledge about and greater focus on women’s health, as it is an area that is currently both underexplored and underprioritized. Women and men naturally have the right to receive the same treatment in the healthcare system, but unfortunately, some women experience that there is a lack of knowledge about women’s diseases and women’s health." Minister for Gender Equality, Magnus Heunicke, says: "We still know too little about women’s health and about women-specific diseases, such as endometriosis. Although the disease affects up to 10 percent of women of reproductive age, only 1.6 percent receive a diagnosis. This is just one example of women not receiving the right help or treatment. That must change." When I first visited the Danish Parliament on March 2, 2021, together with Louise Dreisig, to raise awareness about the lack of focus and research in endometriosis, I hoped — but did not expect — that such a day would come. Today, that hope has turned into policy. Thank you, FEMaLe project! 👏 A huge congratulations and heartfelt respect to the four visionary and tireless women behind Alliancen for Kvinders Sundhed — Camilla Fabricius, Monika Rubin, Anne Sophie Callesen, and Marianne Lynghøj — and to the many passionate advocates across Denmark's regions who have helped elevate women’s health to the top of the national agenda. #WomensHealth #Research #Equality #Denmark #LifeScience #AlliancenForKvindersSundhed #Endometriosis #HealthInnovation https://lnkd.in/dDuDePED

🔨 Hitting the nail on the head! Thank you Maria Shriver — this is EXACTLY where we need to devote investment to save and improve the lives of women and strengthen our economy. This is a win-win opportunity that is right in front of us! SEE THE GAPS: ➡️ Women experience adverse events at 2X the rate as men ➡️ 80% of autoimmune disease patients are women ➡️ #1 killer of women after menopause is heart disease ➡️ Women are 2X as likely to die after an ER admission due to a heart condition than men ➡️ 100% of women are impacted by perimenopause and menopause with some 100 different symptoms experienced over 7-10 years! ➡️ 66% of Alzheimer’s patients over 65 are women ➡️ Lung cancer is the #1 cause of cancer deaths in women—more than breast, ovarian and cervical cancers combined—with an 84% increase among non-smoking women the past few decades ➡️ 3X rate of migraines for women ➡️ 2X rate of mental health conditions for women ➡️ 3.5X maternal mortality rate for Black women and among the worst of developed nations in maternal mortality rates ➡️ 80% of caregivers are — you guessed it — WOMEN! 🤯 Women live on average 5 years longer than men but spend about 25% more of their lives in poor health, which is equal to 9 years! (thanks to report by World Economic Forum and the McKinsey Health Institute https://lnkd.in/eQjC3gX2) FOLLOW THE MONEY (thanks to Carolee Lee Lori Frank and team at Women's Health Access Matters and their must-read WHAM Report: https://thewhamreport.org/): ➡️ 7% of NIH sponsored research is dedicated to autoimmune disease in women ➡️ 4.5% of NIH sponsored research for coronary artery disease research was focused on women ➡️ 12% of NIH sponsored research for Alzheimer’s is focused on women ➡️ 15% of NIH sponsored research is for lung cancer concentrated on women 🤯 8% of NIH extramural grants and 2% of VC and Big Pharma funding is dedicated to women's health (slightly higher if include oncology) As Maria points out, we need more public and private sector investment in better understanding (with accurate, representative data) why certain conditions disproportionately and/or differently impact women and close the gaps in care for these conditions as well as those that solely affect women, and accelerating innovation in women's health. And we need all our voices speaking up on just how critical it is to act now! This impacts all of us, and our voice is our power. Let's make it count! Women's Health Advocates #WomensHealthMatters #WomensHealthMovement https://lnkd.in/evxzVMrV