ReviewHealth research policy and systems2017
Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006-2014.
Review in Health research policy and systems, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Representation of gender in migrant health studies - a systematic review of the social epidemiological literature.International journal for equity in health · 2020Pooled it
- Trial
- Sex-Specific Oral Health: A Narrative Review of Hormonal Influences and Disease Patterns.Dentistry journal · 2026Review
- Article
- Gender sensitivity of the COVID-19 mental health research in Europe: a scoping review.International journal for equity in health · 2024Article
- Recommendations for the Application of Sex and Gender Medicine in Preclinical, Epidemiological and Clinical Research.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Review
- Seroprevalence of leptospirosis in a Mexican military population working with animals.Public health challenges · 2024Article
- Reporting of equity in observational epidemiology: A methodological review.Journal of global health · 2024Review
- Guidance relevant to the reporting of health equity in observational research: a scoping review protocol.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Reporting of health equity considerations in equity-relevant observational studies: Protocol for a systematic assessment.F1000Research · 2022Article
- Effect of Sex in Systemic Psoriasis Therapy: Differences in Prescription, Effectiveness and Safety in the BIOBADADERM Prospective Cohort.Acta dermato-venereologica · 2021Article
- Measurement of gender as a social determinant of health in epidemiology-A scoping review.PloS one · 2021Article
- Sex differences in incidence of respiratory symptoms and management by general practitioners.Family practice · 2020Article
- Bridging research integrity and global health epidemiology (BRIDGE) guidelines: explanation and elaboration.BMJ global health · 2020Review
- Sex difference: an important issue to consider in epidemiological and clinical studies dealing with serum paraoxonase-1.Journal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition · 2019Article
- Interventions on children's and adolescents' physical activity and sedentary behaviour: protocol for a systematic review from a sex/gender perspective.Systematic reviews · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research practice. The aim of this study is to provide good practice examples of sex/gender sensitive health research.
methodsWe conducted a systematic search of research articles published in JECH between 2006 and 2014. An instrument was constructed to evaluate sex/gender sensitivity in four stages of the research process (background, study design, statistical analysis, discussion).
resultsIn total, 37 articles covering diverse topics were included. Thereof, 22 were evaluated as good practice example in at least one stage; two articles achieved highest ratings across all stages. Good examples of the background referred to available knowledge on sex/gender differences and sex/gender informed theoretical frameworks. Related to the study design, good examples calculated sample sizes to be able to detect sex/gender differences, selected sex/gender sensitive outcome/exposure indicators, or chose different cut-off values for male and female participants. Good examples of statistical analyses used interaction terms with sex/gender or different shapes of the estimated relationship for men and women. Examples of good discussions interpreted their findings related to social and biological explanatory models or questioned the statistical methods used to detect sex/gender differences.
conclusionsThe identified good practice examples may inspire researchers to critically reflect on the relevance of sex/gender issues of their studies and help them to translate methodological recommendations of sex/gender sensitivity into research practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.