SynthesisTrials2022
Underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Trials, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 63 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
63 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 108 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Use of Anxiety Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in Dementia Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Pooled it
- Sex Disparities in Intracranial Aneurysm Trial Participation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Electronic Health Record Interventions to Reduce Risk of Hospital Readmissions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Worldwide burden of cervical human papillomavirus (HPV) in women over 50 years with abnormal cytology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ global health · 2025Pooled it
- Complications After Maternal Traumatic Brain Injury During Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Trends in Patient Representation in Low Back Pain Pharmacological Randomized Clinical Trials, 2011 to 2020: A Systematic Review.The journal of pain · 2024Pooled it
- Hormonal mechanisms of women's risk in the face of traumatic stress.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Trial
- Clinical trials in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: a ten-year landscape analysis.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Article
- Unveiling sex dimorphism in the healthy cardiac anatomy: Fundamental differences between male and female heart shapes.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Gender disparities in the development of clinical practice guidelines in Peru.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica · 2026Observational
- Who gets included? Equity in digital and decentralised mental health and neurodevelopmental trials: A systematic review.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Female underrepresentation and adverse events reporting biases in lung cancer clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026Article
- Incorporation of the National Institute of Health (NIH) sex as a biological variable policy by R01 grant awardees.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Quantification of Age and Sex Ratio Differences between Trial and Target Population for New Drugs.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- University students' interest in intervention research participation is associated with gender, age and symptoms of depression, general and social anxiety, panic disorder and self-harm.BMC research notes · 2026Article
- Simulation of the Metabolic Response to an Interventional Study with New Healthy Beverages by Machine-Learning Regression.Journal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2026Article
- Direct Evidence for the Feedforward Neurovascular Coupling Mechanism in Humans During Task Onset: An EEG-fNIRS-TCD Multimodal Imaging Study.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sex-Based Differences in Noncommunicable Diseases in Older Adults: Raising the Profile of Older Females.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2026Article
- A Meta-Epidemiological Analysis of Sex Disparities in Hepatology Clinical Trials.Clinical gastroenterology and hepatology : the official clinical practice journal of the American Gastroenterological Association · 2026Article
3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlthough regulatory changes towards correcting the underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) occurred (National Institutes of Health 1994), concerns exist about whether an improvement is taking place. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the inclusion rates of women in recent RCTs and to explore the potential barriers for the enrollment of women.
methodsRCTs published in 2017 examining any type of intervention in adults were searched in PubMed and Cochrane Library. The following predefined medical fields were included: cardiovascular diseases, neoplasms, endocrine system diseases, respiratory tract diseases, bacterial and fungal infections, viral diseases, digestive system diseases, and immune system diseases. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers, and an equal number of studies was randomly selected per calendric month. The primary outcome was the enrollment rate of women, calculated as the number of randomized women patients divided by the total number of randomized patients. Rates were weighted by their inverse variance; statistical significance was tested using general linear models (GLM).
resultsOut of 398 RCTs assessed for eligibility, 300 RCTs were included. The enrollment rate of women in all the examined fields was lower than 50%, except for immune system diseases [median enrollment rate of 68% (IQR 46 to 81)]. The overall median enrollment rate of women was 41% (IQR 27 to 54). The median enrollment rate of women decreased with older age of the trials' participants [mean age of trials' participants ≤ 45 years: 47% (IQR 30-64), 46-55 years: 46% (IQR 33-58), 56-62 years: 38% (IQR 27-50), ≥ 63 years: 33% (IQR 20-46), p < 0.001]. Methodological quality characteristics showed no significant association with the enrollment rates of women. Out of the 300 included RCTs, eleven did not report on the number of included women. There was no significant difference between these studies and the studies included in the analysis.
conclusionsWomen are being inadequately represented, in the selected medical fields analyzed in our study, in recent RCTs. Older age is a potential barrier for the enrollment of women in clinical trials. Low inclusion rates of elderly women might create a lack of crucial knowledge in the adverse effects and the benefit/risk profile of any given treatment. Factors that might hinder the participation of women should be sought and addressed in the design of the study.
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.