Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40359829›Full record

ArticleClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)2025

Sex and gender differences in cancer research and its application to clinical oncology and therapeutics.

Rut Lucas-Domínguez, Cristina Rius, Yiming Liu, Andrea Sixto-Costoya, Juan Carlos Valderrama-Zurián

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Rut Lucas-DomínguezUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain; Unit associated with the Interuniversity Institute for Advanced Research on the Evaluation of Science and the University (INAECU) UC3M-UAM, Spain; CIBERONC, Valencia, Spain.
Cristina RiusUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain; Unit associated with the Interuniversity Institute for Advanced Research on the Evaluation of Science and the University (INAECU) UC3M-UAM, Spain; Spanish National Centre for Cardiovascular Research (CNIC), Madrid, Spain; CIBERCV, Madrid, Spain. Electronic address: Cristina.Rius@uv.es.
Yiming LiuUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain; Unit associated with the Interuniversity Institute for Advanced Research on the Evaluation of Science and the University (INAECU) UC3M-UAM, Spain.
Andrea Sixto-CostoyaUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain; Unit associated with the Interuniversity Institute for Advanced Research on the Evaluation of Science and the University (INAECU) UC3M-UAM, Spain; Department of Social Work and Social Services, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Valencia, Spain.
Juan Carlos Valderrama-ZuriánUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science. Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Spain; Unit associated with the Interuniversity Institute for Advanced Research on the Evaluation of Science and the University (INAECU) UC3M-UAM, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOncology has exhibited gender inequalities in leadership and authorship, alongside significant differences in cancer incidence, mortality, and survival rates between sexes. These disparities highlight the urgent need for sex- and gender-specific scientific reporting to improve research accuracy and clinical applications and encourage the same opportunities in research careers.

methodsThe integration of gender perspective in cancer was assessed by analyzing scientific publications comparing 2011 and 2021. The correlation between the gender of the authors and the different types of cancer studied was examined, as well as the inclusion of the sex and gender variables in the content of the research. The study was STROBE compliant.

results3,194 papers were published in 2011 and 6,781 in 2021, signed by at least one Spanish institution. The ratio of female authors per article was 0.39 in 2011 compared to 0.43 in 2021, reaching parity. Gender bias in the content of scientific articles, as measured by a 10-item checklist, showed an unfavorable score for perspective integration in both years (1.7/10 and 1.8/10, respectively). In terms of the Gender Balance Index in the analyzed samples of the papers (cells, animals or volunteers/patients), there was an increase from 29 % in 2011 to 43 % in 2021. Breast cancer research was dominated by female authors, whereas lung cancer research was predominantly by parity or male authorship, and no differences in author groups in colorectal cancer research were observed.

conclusionsGreater efforts and commitments are needed from government institutions, funding agencies, and academic structures to promote sex/gender integration in cancer research.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchMedical OncologyNeoplasmsSexismAuthorshipBibliometricsFemaleHumansMaleSex FactorsCancer researchGender biasGender gapSex and gender differencesWomen's health

Identifiers

PMID40359829
PMCPMC12139217

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.