ReviewBiological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society2026
On the importance of including both sexes in animal studies - insights from home-cage monitoring.
Review in Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
A review of behavioural studies using home-cage monitoring (HCM) systems revealed that over 61% of studies used only male subjects, with only 24% including both sexes, despite evidence of substantial behavioural differences between male and female animals. This bias could influence the outcomes of biomedical research. This preference for male subjects has introduced a significant bias in preclinical animal studies, compromising the generalisability of research findings and potentially overlooking important sex differences in disease manifestation and response to therapies. This review highlights such sex differences in laboratory rodent behaviour, as observed through HCM systems. HCM provides an automated method for observing the behaviour of undisturbed animals in a familiar environment, offering valuable insights into sex-specific differences in behaviour and disease progression. In particular, we emphasise how this technology revealed sex differences in spontaneous activity and behaviour in models of neurodegenerative diseases, while demonstrating that, contrary to common belief, female rodents are not more variable than males in their behaviour. We further discuss the reasons underlying the prevalent sex bias in research and advocate for the inclusion of both sexes in neuroscience and behavioural studies, to enhance the generalisability and informative value of preclinical research, avoid unethical waste of animals and resources, and thereby support the Three Rs principles (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement of animal use).
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.