ArticleBiology of sex differences2018
Effectiveness of online learning on health researcher capacity to appropriately integrate sex, gender, or both in grant proposals.
Article in Biology of sex differences, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex Difference in the Treatment of Dupuytren's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials.Plastic surgery (Oakville, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Training in the implementation of sex and gender research policies: an evaluation of publicly available online courses.Biology of sex differences · 2024Review
- Article
- The Integration of Sex and Gender Considerations Into Biomedical Research: Lessons From International Funding Agencies.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism · 2021Article
- Perception of the Online Learning Environment of Nursing Students in Slovenia: Validation of the DREEM Questionnaire.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A 10-year longitudinal evaluation of science policy interventions to promote sex and gender in health research.Health research policy and systems · 2021Article
- Sex bias and omission in neuroscience research is influenced by research model and journal, but not reported NIH funding.Frontiers in neuroendocrinology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo describe the effectiveness of online learning to augment academic capacity to consider sex and gender in the conduct of basic science, clinical research, and population health studies.
methodThe analysis compares pre- and post-test scores from 1441 individuals who completed the Canadian Institutes of Health Research Institute of Gender and Health's interactive e-learning modules between February 2016 and May 2017. The tests measured knowledge, self-efficacy, and self-reported intent to change behavior for three competencies: (1) the ability to appropriately define and distinguish between sex-related versus gender-related variables, (2) the application of methods for integrating sex and gender, and (3) the critical appraisal of sex and gender integration in the design, methods, and analysis plan of research proposals and publications.
resultsOf the 543 individuals who completed the basic science module, 62% demonstrated improved knowledge, and 86% increased self-efficacy across all competencies. Gains in knowledge and self-efficacy also occurred among 84% and 77% of completers of the human data collection module (n = 463) and among 73% and 82% of those who completed the secondary data analysis module (n = 435). In aggregate, 95% of participants reported an intent to change their behavior with respect to sex and gender in health research.
conclusionsInteractive online learning combined with feedback and self-assessment results in improved knowledge and self-efficacy for integrating sex and gender in health research.
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.