Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29451543›Full record

ReviewResearch integrity and peer review2016

Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use.

Shirin Heidari, Thomas F Babor, Paola De Castro, Sera Tort, Mirjam Curno

Erratum issued 2 registry-linked trialsAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Research integrity and peer review, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 999 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
999citing papers in PubMed, 16 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.

NCT06204211 completednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Genetic Research on High Myopic Individuals in Northern China

TypeobservationalSponsorThe First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou UniversityRan2022 to 2023Enrolled1,340ConditionsHigh MyopiaArmsophthalmologic examinations
NCT06873685 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Soft Tissue Sarcoma: Instrumented Evaluation of Motor Performance and Impact of Robotic Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Quality of Life Assessment (START-RUN1)

TypeinterventionalSponsorFondazione Policlinico Universitario Campus Bio-MedicoRan2025 to 2026Enrolled120ConditionsSarcoma, Soft TissueArmsRehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

999 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

939 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shirin HeidariEASE Gender Policy Committee/Reproductive Health Matters, London, UK.
Thomas F Babor2Department of Community Medicine, University of Connecticut School of Medicine, Farmington, CT 06030-6325 USA.
Paola De Castro3Istituto Superiore di Sanità, Rome, Italy.
Sera TortCochrane Editorial Unit, London, UK.
Mirjam Curno5Journal of the International AIDS Society, Geneva, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSex and gender differences are often overlooked in research design, study implementation and scientific reporting, as well as in general science communication. This oversight limits the generalizability of research findings and their applicability to clinical practice, in particular for women but also for men. This article describes the rationale for an international set of guidelines to encourage a more systematic approach to the reporting of sex and gender in research across disciplines.

methodsA panel of 13 experts representing nine countries developed the guidelines through a series of teleconferences, conference presentations and a 2-day workshop. An internet survey of 716 journal editors, scientists and other members of the international publishing community was conducted as well as a literature search on sex and gender policies in scientific publishing.

resultsThe Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines are a comprehensive procedure for reporting of sex and gender information in study design, data analyses, results and interpretation of findings.

conclusionsThe SAGER guidelines are designed primarily to guide authors in preparing their manuscripts, but they are also useful for editors, as gatekeepers of science, to integrate assessment of sex and gender into all manuscripts as an integral part of the editorial process.

Indexed as

EquityGenderGender biasGuidelinesSAGERScientific publishingScientific researchSex

Identifiers

PMID29451543
PMCPMC5793986

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.