ArticleeLife2023
Best practices to promote rigor and reproducibility in the era of sex-inclusive research.
Article in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Media matters: phenol red and fetal bovine serum estrogen in traditional cell culture media influence human mesenchymal stromal cell (hMSC) processes and differentiation in a sex-biased manner.Biology of sex differences · 2026Article
- Developmental and dynamic systems: insights for sex/gender research.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- Sex differences in nucleus accumbens circuitry engaged with binge-like ethanol drinking.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Early life adversity increases striatal dopamine D1 receptor density and promotes social alcohol drinking in mice, especially males.Translational psychiatry · 2026Article
- The "sex-specific effect:" Evaluating analytical approaches to sex-dependence in the behavioral and brain sciences.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Media Matters: Phenol Red and Fetal Bovine Serum Estrogen in Traditional Cell Culture Media Influence Human Mesenchymal Stromal Cell (hMSC) Processes and Differentiation in a Sex-Biased Manner.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Addressing cultural and knowledge barriers to enable preclinical sex inclusive research.eLife · 2025Article
- Sex/gender entanglement: A problem of knots and buckets.Biology of sex differences · 2025Review
- Psychedelic-like effects induced by 2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodoamphetamine, lysergic acid diethylamide, and psilocybin in male and female C57BL/6J mice.Psychopharmacology · 2025Article
- Toward Sex-Specific Biomaterials Innovation: A Perspective.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2025Review
- Sex-Specific Differences in the Secretome of Oligodendrocyte Progenitor Cells Post Hyperoxic Stress.Journal of extracellular biology · 2025Article
- Navigating the paradigm shift of sex inclusive preclinical research and lessons learnt.Communications biology · 2025Article
- The Sex Inclusive Research Framework to address sex bias in preclinical research proposals.Nature communications · 2025Review
- No compelling evidence of sex differences in brain maturation during COVID-19 lockdowns when the sexes are compared statistically.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
- Leveraging research into sex differences and steroid hormones to improve brain health.Nature reviews. Endocrinology · 2025Review
- Uncertainty of adolescent brain maturation sex difference claims.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Reinforcing effects of fentanyl analogs found in illicit drug markets.Psychopharmacology · 2024Article
- Training in the implementation of sex and gender research policies: an evaluation of publicly available online courses.Biology of sex differences · 2024Review
- Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To enhance inclusivity and rigor, many funding agencies and journals now mandate the inclusion of females as well as males in biomedical studies. These mandates have enhanced generalizability and created unprecedented opportunities to discover sex differences. However, education in sound methods to consider sex as a subgroup category has lagged behind, resulting in a problematic literature in which study designs, analyses, and interpretations of results are often flawed. Here, we outline best practices for complying with sex-inclusive mandates, both for studies in which sex differences are a primary focus and for those in which they are not. Our recommendations are organized within the "4 Cs of Studying Sex to Strengthen Science: Consideration, Collection, Characterization and Communication," a framework developed by the Office of Research on Women's Health at the National Institutes of Health in the United States. Following these guidelines should help researchers include females and males in their studies while at the same time upholding high standards of rigor.
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.