ArticleInternational health2022
Considerations of sex and gender dimensions by research ethics committees: a scoping review.
Article in International health, 2022. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating gender medicine into modern healthcare: Progress and barriers.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Review
- Breaking the Glass Ceiling: Female Speaker Representation at the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society Annual Meetings Over Time.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Enhancing health security in Africa: Collaboration between public health institutes and academia.Journal of public health in Africa · 2025Article
- Uncovering the persistent gap: The ongoing challenge of integrating sex and gender in biomedical research.Journal of biomedical research · 2024Article
- Does Sex Matter to the Biomedical Approach in Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs)?: A Systematic Review of Methodology Documents Used in the Spanish National Health System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Sex-Related Differences in the Pharmacological Response in SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Dyslipidemia, and Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Gender issues in nursing research.Korean journal of women health nursing · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite a growing consensus on the importance of integrating sex and gender in health research, research across disciplines continues to be conducted and reported without a gender focus. Research ethics committees (RECs) can play a particularly powerful role in identifying the gender gaps at an early stage of the development of research protocols. Their role is missing in the dialogue related to improving gender awareness and analysis in health research. A scoping review was conducted to examine the extent to which RECs discuss and consider the inclusion and analysis of sex and gender in health research and to examine the literature regarding the gender balance of RECs. The limited literature around gender and research ethics reveals the power and potential of RECs to ensure that gender dimensions are thoughtfully included in health research, and sheds light on the gaps that exist. These include an under-representation of women on RECs, a lack of awareness of the importance of gender-related aspects in health research and a paucity of gender-related training to RECs. Guidelines such as the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines are required for RECs to strengthen the ways in which health research is gendered from conception of a research protocol to its publication.
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.