Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28401121›Full record

ArticleCMAJ open

Sex and gender considerations in Canadian clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review.

Cara Tannenbaum, Barbara Clow, Margaret Haworth-Brockman, Patrice Voss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CMAJ open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Cara TannenbaumFaculties of Medicine and Pharmacy (Tannenbaum), Université de Montréal; Centre de Recherche (Tannenbaum), Institut universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal; Institute of Gender and Health (Tannenbaum, Voss), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Montréal, Que.; Barbara Clow Consulting (Clow); Department of History (Clow), Faculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; Department of Sociology (Haworth-Brockman), Faculty of Arts, University of Winnipeg; Rady Faculty of Health Sciences (Haworth-Brockman), National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man.
Barbara ClowFaculties of Medicine and Pharmacy (Tannenbaum), Université de Montréal; Centre de Recherche (Tannenbaum), Institut universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal; Institute of Gender and Health (Tannenbaum, Voss), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Montréal, Que.; Barbara Clow Consulting (Clow); Department of History (Clow), Faculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; Department of Sociology (Haworth-Brockman), Faculty of Arts, University of Winnipeg; Rady Faculty of Health Sciences (Haworth-Brockman), National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man.
Margaret Haworth-BrockmanFaculties of Medicine and Pharmacy (Tannenbaum), Université de Montréal; Centre de Recherche (Tannenbaum), Institut universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal; Institute of Gender and Health (Tannenbaum, Voss), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Montréal, Que.; Barbara Clow Consulting (Clow); Department of History (Clow), Faculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; Department of Sociology (Haworth-Brockman), Faculty of Arts, University of Winnipeg; Rady Faculty of Health Sciences (Haworth-Brockman), National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man.
Patrice VossFaculties of Medicine and Pharmacy (Tannenbaum), Université de Montréal; Centre de Recherche (Tannenbaum), Institut universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal, Université de Montréal; Institute of Gender and Health (Tannenbaum, Voss), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Montréal, Que.; Barbara Clow Consulting (Clow); Department of History (Clow), Faculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS; Department of Sociology (Haworth-Brockman), Faculty of Arts, University of Winnipeg; Rady Faculty of Health Sciences (Haworth-Brockman), National Collaborating Centre for Infectious Diseases, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Man.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe importance of sex and gender in the diagnosis and management of health conditions is well established, but the extent to which this evidence is integrated into clinical practice guidelines remains unknown. We aimed to determine the proportion of Canadian clinical practice guidelines that integrate evidence on sex and gender considerations.

methodsWe searched the Canadian Medical Association's CPG Infobase, PubMed, all provincial/territorial websites and websites of professional organizations for English- and French-language Canadian clinical practice guidelines published between January 2013 and June 2015 on selected conditions identified as priorities by policy-makers and practitioners. Citations and text were searched electronically using keyword terms related to sex and gender. Three investigators independently analyzed and categorized the content of text-positive clinical practice guidelines based on clinical relevance for practitioners.

resultsOf the 118 clinical practice guidelines that met the inclusion criteria, 79 (66.9%) were text-positive for sex and/or gender keywords; 8 (10%) of the 79 used the keywords only in relation to pregnancy. Of the remaining 71 guidelines, 25 (35%) contained sex-related diagnostic or management recommendations. An additional 5 (7%) contained recommendations for sex-specific laboratory reference values, 29 (41%) referred to differences in epidemiologic features or risk factors only, and 12 (17%) contained nonrelevant mentions of search keywords. Twenty-five (35%) of the text-positive guidelines used the terms "sex" and/or "gender" correctly.

interpretationRecommendations related to sex and gender are inconsistently reported in Canadian clinical practice guidelines. Guidelines such as the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines may help inform the meaningful inclusion of sex and gender evidence in the development of clinical practice guidelines.

Identifiers

PMID28401121
PMCPMC5378537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.