Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27354851›Full record

ReviewThe Yale journal of biology and medicine2016

Balance of the Sexes: Addressing Sex Differences in Preclinical Research.

Yasmin Zakiniaeiz, Kelly P Cosgrove, Marc N Potenza, Carolyn M Mazure

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Sex matters in preclinical research.Disease models & mechanisms · 2024
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Women in neuroscience: Where are we in 2019?Journal of neuroscience research · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Yasmin ZakiniaeizInterdepartmental Neuroscience Program, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Kelly P CosgroveInterdepartmental Neuroscience Program, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Department of Radiology and Bioimaging, Yale University, New Haven, CT; Department of Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, CT; Department of Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Marc N PotenzaDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, CT; Department of Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Child Study Center, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; CASAColumbia, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT; Connecticut Mental Health Center, New Haven, CT; Women's Health Research at Yale, New Haven, CT.
Carolyn M MazureDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale University, New Haven, CT; Women's Health Research at Yale, New Haven, CT.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preclinical research is fundamental for the advancement of biomedical sciences and enhancing healthcare. Considering sex differences in all studies throughout the entire biomedical research pipeline is necessary to adequately inform clinical research and improve health outcomes. However, there is a paucity of information to date on sex differences in preclinical work. As of 2009, most (about 80 percent) rodent studies across 10 fields of biology were still conducted with only male animals. In 2016, the National Institutes of Health implemented a policy aimed to address this concern by requiring the consideration of sex as a biological variable in preclinical research grant applications. This perspective piece aims to (1) provide a brief history of female inclusion in biomedical research, (2) describe the importance of studying sex differences, (3) explain possible reasons for opposition of female inclusion, and (4) present potential additional solutions to reduce sex bias in preclinical research.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsAnimalsBiomedical ResearchClinical Trials as TopicFemaleHumansMaleSexual Behaviorbiomedicalclinical trialspreclinical researchsex differences

Identifiers

PMID27354851
PMCPMC4918870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.