ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
Claims of sex-dependent effects in the behavioral and brain sciences are infrequently supported by valid statistical comparisons.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. 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.
- Claims of sex-dependent effects in the behavioral and brain sciences are infrequently supported by valid statistical comparisons.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interest in precision medicine has accelerated efforts to identify sex-dependent responses to treatments and interventions. Those efforts have, both historically and today, been concentrated in fields related to the brain and behavior. Here, we show that even though articles claiming sex-dependent effects are far more prevalent in the neurosciences than in other fields, those claims are infrequently supported by appropriate statistical evidence. Of 200 recent articles in the behavioral and brain sciences with a claim of a sex- or gender-dependent effect in the title, only 24% supported the claim with appropriate evidence-that is, they compared the effect statistically across sex and reported results consistent with the claim. In 9%, an appropriate test was described but the results were incomplete or missing; another 9% contained results that directly contradicted the claim. In most articles (58%), the effect was not compared statistically across sex. Across six brain-related research areas (behavioral sciences, clinical neurology, neurosciences, psychiatry, psychology, and substance abuse), neurosciences had the lowest rate of appropriate evidence (18%) and psychology the highest (39%). Studies on nonhuman animals supported the claim significantly less frequently (15%) than studies on human participants (34%;
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.