ArticleHeliyon2024
The inclusion of the gender perspective in oncology research with Spanish participation.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Identifying Dimensions and Items for a Questionnaire to Assess Medication Adherence in Men and Women with Ischemic Heart Disease: Insights from the GENADHECAR Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Article
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
The gender perspective is important for a better diagnosis and treatment of diseases, especially in the field of oncology. This study aimed to analyse the gender approach in scientific articles in the field of oncology by studying the gender composition of the authorship of papers and the gender inclusion in the research carried out. A bibliographic search of articles and reviews signed by at least one Spanish institution published between 2010 and 2019 was carried out using the Science Citation Index Expanded database in the Oncology category. A total of 7523 studies were classified according to the gender composition determined by the author's name and a randomised sample was used to evaluate the inclusion of gender perspectives using a checklist. This study revealed a lack of gender parity in the authorship of oncology publications involving Spanish participation. Papers without author gender parity were eight times higher than papers with parity and showed a greater presence of male than female authorship (58 % versus 31 %). Regarding the introduction of the gender perspective, a negative response of 68 % referring to compliance with the entire checklist was obtained, and only a fifth of the articles presented gender balance in the study sample. Moreover, there is a positive correlation between gender parity in authorship and gender perspective integration in published research. In conclusion, there is a great need to advance the inclusion of gender perspectives in cancer research to overcome gender bias and promote better prevention, detection, and intervention for cancer.
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.