Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29668873›Full record

ReviewEndocrine reviews2018

Sex and Gender Differences Research Design for Basic, Clinical, and Population Studies: Essentials for Investigators.

Janet W Rich-Edwards, Ursula B Kaiser, Grace L Chen, JoAnn E Manson, Jill M Goldstein

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Endocrine reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 140 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
140citing papers in PubMed, 9 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

140 citing papers in PubMed, 9 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. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Claims of sex-dependent effects in the behavioral and brain sciences are infrequently supported by valid statistical comparisons.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

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

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

5 authors.

Janet W Rich-EdwardsDivision of Women's Health, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Ursula B KaiserDivision of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Hypertension, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Grace L ChenConnors Center for Women's Health and Gender Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
JoAnn E MansonConnors Center for Women's Health and Gender Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Jill M GoldsteinDivision of Women's Health, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.

Funding

Deciphering the functional role of MKRN3 in puberty and reproductionR01HD082314 · NICHD · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Ursula B. Kaiser · 2015 to 2026
$5.7M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD082314
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A sex- and gender-informed perspective increases rigor, promotes discovery, and expands the relevance of biomedical research. In the current era of accountability to present data for males and females, thoughtful and deliberate methodology can improve study design and inference in sex and gender differences research. We address issues of motivation, subject selection, sample size, data collection, analysis, and interpretation, considering implications for basic, clinical, and population research. In particular, we focus on methods to test sex/gender differences as effect modification or interaction, and discuss why some inferences from sex-stratified data should be viewed with caution. Without careful methodology, the pursuit of sex difference research, despite a mandate from funding agencies, will result in a literature of contradiction. However, given the historic lack of attention to sex differences, the absence of evidence for sex differences is not necessarily evidence of the absence of sex differences. Thoughtfully conceived and conducted sex and gender differences research is needed to drive scientific and therapeutic discovery for all sexes and genders.

Indexed as

Data Interpretation, StatisticalSex CharacteristicsSex FactorsBiomedical ResearchFemaleHumansMaleResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID29668873
PMCPMC7263836

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.