Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals: A multicenter cross-sectional study
6 affiliations
- 1Faculty of Medicine, Damascus University, Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic
- 2Faculty of Medicine, University of Aleppo, Aleppo, Syrian Arab Republic
- 3Faculty of Medicine, University of Tartous, Tartous, Syrian Arab Republic
- 4Faculty of Human Medicine, University of Hama, Hama, Syrian Arab Republic
- 5Faculty of Medicine, Latakia University, Latakia, Syrian Arab Republic
- 6Department of Pediatric Surgery, Aleppo University Hospital, University of Aleppo, Aleppo, Syrian Arab Republic
Abstract
Background: Physician sex can influence communication, comfort, and care-seeking. Evidence from conservative contexts suggests preferences are strongest in intimate examinations and vary by specialty. Local data from Syria are limited. Methods: We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional survey in major Syrian public teaching hospitals. Adults attending participating hospitals, including patients and accompanying companions, completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire adapted from prior work and reviewed for clarity in Arabic, capturing preference for physician sex (male, female, no preference) across (i) attitudinal domains, (ii) common clinical interactions (e.g., history taking, general and intimate examinations, emergencies, procedures), and (iii) medical specialties. Demographics included age, participant sex, marital status, education, religion, religiosity, and income. Associations were assessed using chi-square tests and multinomial logistic regression with “no preference” as the reference category. Results: Across attitudinal domains and routine interactions, many participants reported no preference. In sensitive contexts, particularly intimate examinations, sex-concordant care was frequently preferred. Female participants tended to prefer female physicians for intimate and reproductive health encounters, whereas male participants more often preferred male physicians for general and intimate examinations. By specialty, preference for male physicians was more common in surgery-related fields (e.g., general surgery, orthopedics, urology), while preference for female physicians predominated in obstetrics/gynecology and select relational specialties (e.g., psychiatry, dermatology). In emergency or life-threatening scenarios, neutrality was common. Exploratory adjusted analyses identified several demographic associations, with participant sex showing the most consistent pattern across multiple contexts. Conclusions: Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals were context-dependent, peaking in intimate examinations and varying by specialty. Ensuring feasible options for sex-concordant care in selected services, alongside communication training for all clinicians, may improve comfort and engagement among hospital attendees. Future research should evaluate how these preferences affect care utilization and outcomes, and explore clinician factors (e.g., seniority, communication style) that may mitigate or amplify preference effects.
Related
- Association between hypovitaminosis D and uterine leiomyomas among women of reproductive age attending selected hospitals in Uganda: A multicenter cross-sectional study
- Distribution and factors associated with refractive errors among young adults attending ophthalmic clinics in Iraq: a multicenter cross-sectional study
- Prevalence of hepatitis B virus infection and associated factors among pregnant women attending antenatal care in public hospitals of the Eastern Zone of Tigray, Northern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study
- Outpatients’ endorsement of societal recognition and respect for healthcare professionals in China’s tertiary public hospitals: a national multicenter cross-sectional study
- Association of one-stop administrative and logistics services with patient satisfaction in smart hospitals: A multicenter cross-sectional study.
BibTeX
@article{nasra2026preferences,
title = {{Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals: A multicenter cross-sectional study}},
author = {Ahmad Bishr Nasra and Malaka Abubakir and Lana Sabbagh and Zakaria Huseen and Mohammad Nasra and Mohammad Wesam Almohammad Alibrahim and Basel Zeitoun and Maria Kheder and Mohamad Morjan},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0359066},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359066},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals: A multicenter cross-sectional study
AU - Ahmad Bishr Nasra
AU - Malaka Abubakir
AU - Lana Sabbagh
AU - Zakaria Huseen
AU - Mohammad Nasra
AU - Mohammad Wesam Almohammad Alibrahim
AU - Basel Zeitoun
AU - Maria Kheder
AU - Mohamad Morjan
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/24
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0359066
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0359066
AB - Background: Physician sex can influence communication, comfort, and care-seeking. Evidence from conservative contexts suggests preferences are strongest in intimate examinations and vary by specialty. Local data from Syria are limited. Methods: We conducted a multicenter cross-sectional survey in major Syrian public teaching hospitals. Adults attending participating hospitals, including patients and accompanying companions, completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire adapted from prior work and reviewed for clarity in Arabic, capturing preference for physician sex (male, female, no preference) across (i) attitudinal domains, (ii) common clinical interactions (e.g., history taking, general and intimate examinations, emergencies, procedures), and (iii) medical specialties. Demographics included age, participant sex, marital status, education, religion, religiosity, and income. Associations were assessed using chi-square tests and multinomial logistic regression with “no preference” as the reference category. Results: Across attitudinal domains and routine interactions, many participants reported no preference. In sensitive contexts, particularly intimate examinations, sex-concordant care was frequently preferred. Female participants tended to prefer female physicians for intimate and reproductive health encounters, whereas male participants more often preferred male physicians for general and intimate examinations. By specialty, preference for male physicians was more common in surgery-related fields (e.g., general surgery, orthopedics, urology), while preference for female physicians predominated in obstetrics/gynecology and select relational specialties (e.g., psychiatry, dermatology). In emergency or life-threatening scenarios, neutrality was common. Exploratory adjusted analyses identified several demographic associations, with participant sex showing the most consistent pattern across multiple contexts. Conclusions: Preferences for physician sex among adults attending Syrian public teaching hospitals were context-dependent, peaking in intimate examinations and varying by specialty. Ensuring feasible options for sex-concordant care in selected services, alongside communication training for all clinicians, may improve comfort and engagement among hospital attendees. Future research should evaluate how these preferences affect care utilization and outcomes, and explore clinician factors (e.g., seniority, communication style) that may mitigate or amplify preference effects.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -