Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31971851›Full record

ArticleJournal of women's health (2002)2020

Sex as a Biological Variable: A 5-Year Progress Report and Call to Action.

Matthew E Arnegard, Lori A Whitten, Chyren Hunter, Janine Austin Clayton

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of women's health (2002), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 193 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
193citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

193 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The progression of sex differences in brain networks across the lifespan.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

133 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

4 authors.

Matthew E ArnegardOffice of Research on Women's Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Lori A WhittenSynergy Enterprises, Inc., Silver Spring, Maryland.
Chyren HunterOffice of Research on Women's Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Janine Austin ClaytonOffice of Research on Women's Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A little over 5 years ago, the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced the intention to develop policies to require applicants to report plans to balance male and female cells and animals in preclinical investigations. Soon thereafter, the NIH issued a request for information from the scientific community and consulted with various stakeholders. The feedback received was considered during development of policy requiring the consideration of sex as a biological variable (SABV) in NIH-funded research on vertebrate animals and humans, which went into effect for applications due on or after January 25, 2016. We identified NIH programs related to SABV and reviewed SABV-relevant scientific literature. We find that the application of SABV throughout the research process can serve as a guiding principle to improve the value of biomedical science. The NIH is engaged in ongoing efforts to develop resources to help investigators consider SABV in their research. We also provide an update on lessons learned, highlight ways that different disciplines consider SABV, and describe the opportunities for scientific discovery that applying SABV offers. We call on NIH's various stakeholders to redouble their efforts to integrate SABV throughout the biomedical research enterprise. Sex- and gender-aware investigations are critical to the conduct of rigorous and transparent science and the advancement of personalized medicine. This kind of research achieves its greatest potential when sex and gender considerations are integrated into the biomedical research enterprise in an end-to-end manner, from basic and preclinical investigations, through translational and clinical research, to improved health care delivery.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchSex CharacteristicsSex FactorsFemaleHumansMaleNational Institutes of Health (U.S.)United StatesWomen's Healthclinical trialgenderNational Institutes of Healthpersonalized medicinepolicypreclinical researchsex as a biological variablewomen's health

Identifiers

PMID31971851
PMCPMC7476377

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.