Gender roles and women’s pain experience: a systematic review
This systematic review of 19 studies published between 2015 and 2025 reveals that women's chronic pain is shaped by a complex interplay of biological, psychosocial, and sociocultural factors—including gender roles and structural inequalities—necessitating a shift from purely biomedical models to integrative, gender-sensitive approaches in research and clinical practice.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Pain is not merely a signal from a damaged part of the body; it is a complex experience that blends physical sensation with emotion and memory. When this sensation persists for more than three months, doctors classify it as chronic pain, a condition that carries a heavy toll on individuals and societies alike. While pain affects everyone, the way it is felt, described, and treated often depends heavily on who is experiencing it. For decades, medical research has frequently treated the human body as a neutral standard, often overlooking how biological differences and social expectations shape the reality of suffering. This gap in understanding has left many questions unanswered, particularly regarding why women report pain more often and more intensely than men, and why their suffering is sometimes dismissed or misunderstood by the very systems designed to help them.
A new systematic review, conducted by researchers at the Federal University of Minas Gerais in Brazil, seeks to clarify this picture by gathering evidence from nearly a decade of scientific literature. The team examined nineteen studies published between 2015 and 2025, looking for patterns in how women experience chronic pain. While the included research was predominantly quantitative, the researchers synthesized findings from studies that measured physical symptoms alongside the limited qualitative research available to build a comprehensive view of a problem that cannot be solved by looking at biology alone.
The review confirms that women carry a heavier burden of chronic pain than men. They experience higher rates of conditions like migraines and pelvic pain, often suffering from more frequent attacks and greater interference in their daily lives. Beyond the physical intensity, women face a significant emotional weight. The studies found that women are more likely to struggle with anxiety, depression, and a tendency to view their pain as catastrophic or unmanageable. This emotional distress is not just a reaction to pain; it appears to be woven into the experience of pain itself, creating a cycle where fear and sadness can make the physical sensation feel even more overwhelming.
A major part of this experience is shaped by the social roles women are expected to play. The researchers found that the expectation to be a caregiver, often combined with unpaid domestic labor, creates a unique pressure. When a woman is in pain, she is frequently expected to continue caring for her family and managing a household, which can delay her seeking treatment or make it harder to rest and recover. This social context also influences how others perceive her pain. The review highlights a troubling pattern where women's pain is often stigmatized or dismissed as a "women's disease," leading to underdiagnosis and inadequate treatment. In emergency rooms, for instance, women are less likely to receive strong pain medication for abdominal pain and are more likely to be referred for psychological treatment, suggesting that their physical suffering is sometimes mistaken for an emotional problem.
The medical system itself plays a role in these disparities. The researchers noted that clinical practice often treats men and women differently, even when the pain is the same. Women tend to receive lower doses of strong painkillers like morphine compared to men, while being more frequently directed toward physical therapy or counseling. This suggests that gender biases can shape not only how pain is interpreted but also the specific tools used to manage it. Furthermore, the review points out that much of the research has historically focused on men, creating a gap in knowledge about how female biology interacts with pain. Hormonal fluctuations related to the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, and menopause clearly influence pain intensity and frequency, yet these factors are often not fully integrated into standard treatment plans.
Despite these challenges, the review emphasizes that the solution lies in a more complete understanding of the human experience. The authors argue that chronic pain in women cannot be explained by biology alone, nor can it be fixed by ignoring the social inequalities that surround it. The evidence suggests that effective care requires a shift away from viewing pain as a simple mechanical failure. Instead, doctors and researchers must consider the whole person, acknowledging how hormonal changes, emotional burdens, and societal expectations combine to create a unique and often difficult reality for women in pain. By recognizing these layers, the medical community can move toward treatments that are not only scientifically sound but also sensitive to the lived experiences of those they aim to help.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.