The authors reply

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


We thank Gali et al (1) for their letter regarding our research study (2), recently published in Critical Care Medicine.
The trial was a randomized-controlled trial. Randomization was in regard to team composition with no intervention. As mentioned in our article (2), all communication was transcribed word-by-word and a trained (male) observer coded each leadership statement. A second (female) senior observer assessed the transcripts in a blinded fashion, and eventual disagreements were discussed until consensus was found. There was a predefined operationalization list regarding leadership statements. We had clearly defined primary and secondary endpoints, and the study was thus not exploratory as implied by Gali et al (1). Also, there were no false-positive findings, but rather—as stated in our article (2)—the findings need validation in other populations as simulator studies do have limitations (3). We appreciate the critical appraisal of our work and encourage Gali et al (1) to perform further studies regarding gender in resuscitation situations to overcome remaining limitations and further advance the field. This would indeed help to dissolve differences between female and male rescuers and help to reduce gender inequalities in the long run—which was the main goal of our study (2). Although we agree that gender research is delicate, pretending that females and males behave equally without having scientific proof seems not helpful and does not support females.
    loading  Loading Related Articles