Fifth anniversary of the Sex And Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines: taking stock and looking ahead

A sex- and gender-based analysis of alcohol treatment intervention research involving youth: A methodological systematic review

BACKGROUND

While there is widespread consensus that sex- and gender-related factors are important for how interventions are designed, implemented, and evaluated, it is not currently known how alcohol treatment research accounts for sex characteristics and/or gender identities and modalities. This methodological systematic review documents and assesses how sex characteristics, gender identities, and gender modalities are operationalized in alcohol treatment intervention research involving youth.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LGBT Life, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and grey literature from 2008 to 2023. We included articles that reported genders and/or sexes of participants 30 years of age and under and screened participants using AUDIT, AUDIT-C, or a structured interview using DSM-IV criteria. We limited the inclusion to studies that enrolled participants in alcohol treatment interventions and used a quantitative study design. We provide a narrative overview of the findings. Of 8,019 studies screened for inclusion, 86 articles were included in the review. None of the studies defined, measured, and reported both sex and gender variables accurately. Only 2 studies reported including trans participants. Most of the studies used gender or sex measures as a covariate to control for the effects of sex or gender on the intervention but did not discuss the rationale for or implications of this procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings identify that the majority of alcohol treatment intervention research with youth conflate sex and gender factors, including terminologically, conceptually, and methodologically. Based on these findings, we recommend future research in this area define and account for a spectrum of gender modalities, identities, and/or sex characteristics throughout the research life cycle, including during study design, data collection, data analysis, and reporting. It is also imperative that sex and gender variables are used expansively to ensure that intersex and trans youth are meaningfully integrated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration: PROSPERO, registration number: CRD42019119408.

The Canadian Women's Heart Health Alliance ATLAS on the Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Management of Cardiovascular Disease in Women - Chapter 8: Knowledge Gaps and Status of Existing Research Programs in Canada

Despite significant progress in medical research and public health efforts, gaps in knowledge of women's heart health remain across epidemiology, presentation, management, outcomes, education, research, and publications. Historically, heart disease was viewed primarily as a condition in men and male individuals, leading to limited understanding of the unique risks and symptoms that women experience. These knowledge gaps are particularly problematic because globally heart disease is the leading cause of death for women. Until recently, sex and gender have not been addressed in cardiovascular research, including in preclinical and clinical research. Recruitment was often limited to male participants and individuals identifying as men, and data analysis according to sex or gender was not conducted, leading to a lack of data on how treatments and interventions might affect female patients and individuals who identify as women differently. This lack of data has led to suboptimal treatment and limitations in our understanding of the underlying mechanisms of heart disease in women, and is directly related to limited awareness and knowledge gaps in professional training and public education. Women are often unaware of their risk factors for heart disease or symptoms they might experience, leading to delays in diagnosis and treatments. Additionally, health care providers might not receive adequate training to diagnose and treat heart disease in women, leading to misdiagnosis or undertreatment. Addressing these knowledge gaps requires a multipronged approach, including education and policy change, built on evidence-based research. In this chapter we review the current state of existing cardiovascular research in Canada with a specific focus on women.

Ways to get a more balanced gender representation in addiction journals' management and workforce

Although the scientific community, particularly academic publishing, claims to be gender-neutral and based on meritocracy, it mirrors other parts of modern society, wherein residual gender imbalances and implicit and explicit gender biases are reproduced. In this report, we address gender imbalances (in particular, the overrepresentation of men) in the editorial workforce of academic journals as barriers to women's promotion and career progression in addiction science. We also consider potential gender-related elements and biases in the peer-review and editorial decision-making processes, which may result in women's lower publication rates, thereby creating another gender-related barrier to women's promotion, career progression and academic recognition. Establishing a more balanced gender representation in addiction publishing will require the adoption of the SAGER guidelines and the development of Gender Equality Plans for addiction specialty journals. Finally, although our focus concerns gender, the organisational mechanisms identified here also affect other types of heterogeneity and intersectional thinking.

A roadmap for sex- and gender-disaggregated health research

Sex and gender are fundamental aspects of health and wellbeing. Yet many research studies fail to consider sex or gender differences, and even when they do this is often limited to merely cataloguing such differences in the makeup of study populations. The evidence on sex and gender differences is thus incomplete in most areas of medicine. This article presents a roadmap for the systematic conduct of sex- and gender-disaggregated health research. We distinguish three phases: the exploration of sex and gender differences in disease risk, presentation, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes; explaining any found differences by revealing the underlying mechanisms; and translation of the implications of such differences to policy and practice. For each phase, we provide critical methodological considerations and practical examples are provided, taken primarily from the field of cardiovascular disease. We also discuss key overarching themes and terminology that are at the essence of any study evaluating the relevance of sex and gender in health. Here, we limit ourselves to binary sex and gender in order to produce a coherent, succinct narrative. Further disaggregation by sex and gender separately and which recognises intersex, non-binary, and gender-diverse identities, as well as other aspects of intersectionality, can build on this basic minimum level of disaggregation. We envision that uptake of this roadmap, together with wider policy and educational activities, will aid researchers to systematically explore and explain relevant sex and gender differences in health and will aid educators, clinicians, and policymakers to translate the outcomes of research in the most effective and meaningful way, for the benefit of all.

Establishment of a Private Foundation-Academic Partnership to Promote Careers of Early-Stage Investigators Examining the Influence of Sex and Gender on Health and Health Care

Biological sex and gender-based constructs contribute significantly to the diversity of disease outcomes and treatment responses across the life course. To promote research considering sex and gender, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH) launched the Specialized Centers of Research Excellence (SCORE) on sex differences program. The Career Enhancement Core (CEC) of the Johns Hopkins SCORE on Sex and Age Differences in Immunity to Influenza (SADII) partnered with the Foundation for Gender-Specific Medicine, which matched NIH funding to support seed grants. Over 3 years we awarded 12 (10 were women faculty) seed grants to early-stage investigators. One year after the award, the seed grant awardees highlighted their progress, including publications, grant applications, and abstracts. All awardees noted challenges with their progress related to the COVID-19 pandemic and supply chain delays and shared suggestions for improving the programming of the CEC. They also highlighted the multiple ways the awards had helped them gain pilot data toward larger grants, build collaborative relationships, and present at the annual SCORE symposium. We describe a model and evidence supporting a private-academic collaboration to support the careers of early-stage investigators conducting research related to sex and gender.

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all.

A shared agenda for gender and COVID-19 research: priorities based on broadening engagement in science

While the acute and collective crisis from the pandemic is over, an estimated 2.5 million people died from COVID-19 in 2022, tens of millions suffer from long COVID and national economies still reel from multiple deprivations exacerbated by the pandemic. Sex and gender biases deeply mark these evolving experiences of COVID-19, impacting the quality of science and effectiveness of the responses deployed. To galvanise change by strengthening evidence-informed inclusion of sex and gender in COVID-19 practice, we led a virtual collaboration to articulate and prioritise gender and COVID-19 research needs. In addition to standard prioritisation surveys, feminist principles mindful of intersectional power dynamics underpinned how we reviewed research gaps, framed research questions and discussed emergent findings. The collaborative research agenda-setting exercise engaged over 900 participants primarily from low/middle-income countries in varied activities. The top 21 research questions included the importance of the needs of pregnant and lactating women and information systems that enable sex-disaggregated analysis. Gender and intersectional aspects to improving vaccine uptake, access to health services, measures against gender-based violence and integrating gender in health systems were also prioritised. These priorities are shaped by more inclusive ways of working, which are critical for global health as it faces further uncertainties in the aftermath of COVID-19. It remains imperative to address the basics in gender and health (sex-disaggregated data and sex-specific needs) and also advance transformational goals to advance gender justice across health and social policies, including those related to global research.

The quality of gender and sex integration in scientific articles resulting from health research funded by the Brazilian Ministry of Health 2004-2016

Aim

Integrating sex and gender into health research is critical to contributing to an ethical and more responsible science to address significant knowledge gaps, resulting in higher-quality evidence for all.

Subject and methods

Using the Essential Metrics for Assessing Sex and Gender Integration in Health Research Proposals Involving Human Participants, we evaluate the quality of the integration of sex and gender in the 350 scientific articles produced by 144 health studies funded by the Department of Science and Technology of the Brazilian Ministry of Health between 2004 and 2016.

Results

The results show that clinical research articles are the type of studies that most frequently report on sex differences, while population and public health research articles most frequently report on gender differences. Analysis of the quality of sex and gender integration reveals low levels of qualification in the items of the literature review and research objectives (section 1) and participant recruitment and retention (section 2). However, the data collection tools, data analysis, and knowledge translation (section 3) items were rated as excellent and good.

Conclusion

Funding agencies and public institutions should recognize the importance of the integration of sex and gender at all stages of the research process, for instance, through awareness and training for researchers and reviewers, clear requirements, and the possibility to use metrics in the evaluations process.

Lack of attention to sex and gender in periodontitis-related randomized clinical trials: A meta-research study

AIM

This meta-research study aimed to investigate the level of compliance with the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) Guidelines for the inclusion, analysis, and reporting of sex/gender, in periodontitis-related randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following the inclusion of RCTs related to the treatment of periodontitis published between 2018 and 2019, we applied the SAGER checklist to assess the adherence to sex/gender reporting guidelines. We used non-parametric descriptive statistics and correlation models to test the association of the dependent outcome with other variables.

RESULTS

One hundred and one articles were included in the analysis. The female enrolment ranged between 30% and 94%. Twenty-six studies enrolled less than 50% of female participants. The overall SAGER score (OSS) of item fulfilment ranged between 0 and 7 items with an average of 1.9 items signifying poor guideline adherence to the SAGER guidelines. These findings were not associated with the corresponding author gender (p = .623), publication year (p = .947), and funding source (p = .133). However, a significant but negative correlation with journal impact factor (r = -0.253, p = .026) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Sex and gender were frequently disregarded in clinical trial reporting. This oversight might limit the understanding of sex/gender differences in periodontitis-related clinical trials.