ArticleSystematic reviews2024
Strategies for enhancing the representation of women in clinical trials: an evidence map.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cardiovascular disease risk reduction interventions for indigenous women: an umbrella review.Health promotion international · 2026Pooled it
- Sex and gender considerations in randomized controlled trials in critical care nephrology: a meta-epidemiologic study.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Electronic Health Record Interventions to Reduce Risk of Hospital Readmissions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2025Pooled it
- Sex differences in inappropriate imaging requests: insights from the Medical Imaging Decision And Support (MIDAS) study.European radiology · 2026Trial
- Optimizing accelerometer implementation in a gerotherapeutic trial: Feasibility, adherence, and operational insights of ABLE.PLOS digital health · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Gender-related facilitators and barriers to participation in research on aging using fuzzy cognitive mapping.Neurobiology of aging · 2026Article
- Article
- Quantification of Age and Sex Ratio Differences between Trial and Target Population for New Drugs.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Sex Differences in Cancer Immunotherapy-Clinical Evidence and Mechanisms With a Focus on NSCLC.Immunological reviews · 2026Review
- Representation of women and historically underserved populations in hypertension and diabetes clinical trials at Federally Qualified Health Centers: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Community-informed development of an in-person forum to promote breast cancer screening and research preparedness in rural and low-socioeconomic status women.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2026Article
- Exploring gender differences in empathy development among medical students: a qualitative analysis of reflections on juvenile correctional school visits.Medical education online · 2025Article
- Innovative design and modelling to improve sex and gender analysis in clinical trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Development of a health equity tool in resuscitation sciences and application to current research in extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation for cardiac arrest.Resuscitation · 2025Review
- Drp1-associated genes implicated in sepsis survival.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Oral Anticoagulants in Women: What's the Difference? A Narrative Review.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisReview
- Toward demographic robustness in digital patient twins: Addressing the gender data gap.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEquitable sex- and gender-based representation in clinical trials is an essential step to ensuring evidence-based care for women. While multi-institutional actions have led to significant improvements in the inclusion of women in trials, inequity persists in areas like sex-neutral cancers and cardiovascular disease. We sought to identify strategies described or evaluated to boost the inclusion of women in clinical trials.
methodsWe used evidence mapping methodology to examine the breadth of relevant literature. We developed an a priori protocol and followed reporting guidance from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis where applicable. We searched MEDLINE
resultsWe identified 122 articles describing recruitment and retention strategies for 136 trials (377,595 women). Only one article distinguished between the sex and gender identity of participants, and none defined their use of the terms such as "women" or "female". The majority of articles (95%) described recruitment for only women, and 64% were conducted in the USA. Ninety-two articles (75%) described strategies in the context of sex-specific conditions (e.g., gynecologic diagnosis). The majority of included articles evaluated a behavioral intervention (52%), with 23% evaluating pharmacologic interventions and 4% invasive interventions. The most common trial phase for reported strategies was during outreach to potential participants (116 articles), followed by intervention delivery (76), enrollment (40), outcomes assessment (21), analysis and interpretation (3), and dissemination (4). We describe specific types of strategies within each of these phases.
conclusionsMost of the existing literature describing strategies to improve the inclusion of women draws from trials for sex-specific conditions and is largely related to outreach to potential participants. There is little information about how and if studies have attempted to proportionally increase the inclusion of women in trials with both men and women or those focused on invasive and pharmacologic interventions. Future work in this area should focus on how to increase the participation of women in mixed-sex studies and on those areas with remaining inequities in trial participation.
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.