ArticlePloS one2024
The implementation of sex-and gender-based considerations in exercise-based randomized controlled trials in individuals with stroke: A cross-sectional study.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Handgrip strength associated with cardiorespiratory fitness in male patients with subacute stroke: a cross-sectional study.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Emerging evidence suggests that sex-and gender-based factors may influence responses to exercise post-stroke. The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines (2016) published international standards for terminology and considerations for research design and trial reporting. The extent to which sex- and gender-based considerations have been implemented in stroke exercise trials is currently unknown. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to compare the proportion of studies that have implemented sex/gender considerations before and after the publication of the SAGER guidelines. We conducted a comprehensive search of the literature to identify exercise-based trials in individuals with stroke. Study titles, abstracts, introductions (hypothesis statements), methods, results and discussions were assessed for adherence to the SAGER guidelines. The proportion of studies adhering to SAGER guidelines published prior to and including December 31, 2016 and from 2017-March 2023 were compared. Of the 245 studies identified, 150 were published before December 31, 2016, of which 0 (0%) titles/abstracts, 0 (0%) introductions, 21 (14.0%) methods, 8 (5.3%) results, and 7 (4.7%) discussion sections adhered to the SAGER guidelines, and 35 (23.3%) reported proper sex and gender terminology. Of the 95 studies published between 2017-2023, 0 (0%) title/abstracts, 1 (1.0%) introduction, 16 (16.8%) methods, 5 (5.3%) results, and 10 (10.5%) discussion sections adhered to the guidelines, and 37 (38.9%) of studies included proper terminology. The implementation of sex- and gender-based considerations in stroke exercise trials is low, but positively the reporting of proper terminology has increased since the publication of standardized reporting guidelines. This study serves as a call to action for stroke rehabilitation researchers to incorporate sex- and gender-based considerations in all stages of research studies, to improve the rigour and generalizability of findings, and promote health equity.
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.