ArticleBMJ open2023
Sex differences in neurology: a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Irritable bowel syndrome and restless legs syndrome: a narrative review of epidemiological and pathophysiological overlap.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Review
- 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 · 2026Article
- Effects of Biological Sex and Age on Cerebrospinal Fluid Markers-A Retrospective Observational Study.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2026Observational
- Sex as a biological variable in nonclinical studies: Bridging scientific rigor, animal welfare, and regulatory expectations.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Checking assumptions: advancing the analysis of sex and gender in health sciences.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- Sex-specific proteomic analysis of epileptic brain tissues from Pten knockout mice and human refractory epilepsy.Experimental neurology · 2025Article
- Women's neurology: a growing subspeciality to tackle sex and gender disparities.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2025Article
- Sex differences in caloric nystagmus intensity: Should reference values be updated?Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Article
- Exploratory Study of Sex Differences in P-Glycoprotein Function at the Blood-Brain Barrier.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Operant ethanol self-administration behaviors do not predict sex differences in continuous access home cage drinking.Alcohol (Fayetteville, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Sex differences in multiple sclerosis relapse presentation and outcome: a retrospective, monocentric study of 134 relapse events.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveHistorically, neurology research has demonstrated a sex bias with mainly male subjects included in clinical trials as well as lack of reporting of data by sex. In recent years, emphasis has been placed on increased participation of female participants and explicit declaration/evaluation of sex differences in clinical research.We aimed to review the available literature examining sex differences across four subspecialty areas in neurology (demyelination, headache, stroke, epilepsy) and whether sex and gender terms have been used appropriately.
designThis scoping review was performed by searching Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Ovid Emcare and APA PsycINFO databases from 2014 to 2020. Four independent pairs of reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Studies whose primary objective was to assess sex or gender differences among adults with one of four neurological conditions were included. We report the scope, content and trends of previous studies that have evaluated sex differences in neurology.
resultsThe search retrieved 22 745 articles. Five hundred and eighty-five studies met the inclusion criteria in the review. The majority of studies were observational, often examining similar concepts designed for a different country or regional population, with rare randomised controlled trials designed specifically to assess sex differences in neurology. There was heterogeneity observed in areas of sex-specific focus between the four subspecialty areas. Thirty-six per cent (n=212) of articles used the terms sex and gender interchangeably or incorrectly.
conclusionsSex and gender are important biological and social determinants of health. However, the more explicit recognition of these factors in clinical literature has not been adequately translated to significant change in neuroscience research regarding sex differences. This study illustrates the ongoing need for more urgent informed action to recognise and act on sex differences in scientific discovery and correct the use of sex and gender terminology.
trial registrationThe protocol for this scoping review was registered with Open Science Framework.
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.