The challenges of including sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a qualitative survey

Sex as a prognostic factor for mortality in adults with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism

BACKGROUND

Pulmonary embolism (PE) is relatively common worldwide. It is a serious condition that can be life-threatening. Studies on the relationship between adverse outcomes of this condition and whether a patient is male or female have yielded inconsistent results. Determining whether there is an association between sex and short-term mortality in patients with acute PE is important as this information may help guide different approaches to PE monitoring and treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether sex (i.e. being a male or a female patient) is an independent prognostic factor for predicting mortality in adults with acute symptomatic pulmonary embolism.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials register up to 17 February 2023. We scanned conference abstracts and reference lists of included studies and systematic reviews. We also contacted experts to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included phase 2-confirmatory prognostic studies, that is, any longitudinal study (prospective or retrospective) evaluating the independent association between sex (male or female) and mortality in adults with acute PE.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of prognostic factor studies (CHARMS-PF) and the Cochrane Prognosis Methods Group template for prognosis reviews. Two review authors independently screened the studies, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias according to the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool, and assessed the certainty of the evidence (GRADE). Meta-analyses were performed by pooling adjusted estimates. When meta-analysis was not possible, we reported the main results narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven studies (726,293 participants), all of which were retrospective cohort studies with participants recruited and managed in hospitals between 2000 and 2018. Studies took place in the USA, Spain, and Japan. Most studies were multicentre. None were conducted in low- or middle-income countries. The participants' mean age ranged from 62 to 69 years, and the proportion of females was higher in six of the seven studies, ranging from 46% to 60%. Sex and gender terms were used inconsistently. Participants received different PE treatments: reperfusion, inferior vena cava filter, anticoagulation, and haemodynamic/respiratory support. The prognostication time (the point from which the outcome was predicted) was frequently omitted. The included studies provided data for three of our outcomes of interest. We did not consider any of the studies to be at an overall low risk of bias for any of the outcomes analysed. We judged the certainty of the evidence as moderate to low due to imprecision and risk of bias. We found moderate-certainty evidence (due to imprecision) that for female patients there is likely a small but clinically important reduction in all-cause mortality at 30 days (odds ratio (OR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.92; I2 = 0%; absolute risk difference (ARD) 24 fewer deaths in women per 1000 participants, 95% CI 35 to 10 fewer; 2 studies, 17,627 participants). However, the remaining review outcomes do not indicate lower mortality in female patients. There is low-certainty evidence (due to serious risk of bias and imprecision) indicating that for females with PE, there may be a small but clinically important increase in all-cause hospital mortality (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.22; I2 = 21.7%; 95% prediction interval (PI) 0.76 to 1.61; ARD 13 more deaths in women per 1000 participants, 95% CI 0 to 26 more; 3 studies, 611,210 participants). There is also low-certainty evidence (due to very serious imprecision) indicating that there may be little to no difference between males and females in PE-related mortality at 30 days (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.12; I2 = 0%; ARD 4 more deaths in women per 1000 participants, 95% CI 22 fewer to 50 more; 2 studies, 3524 participants). No study data was found for the other outcomes, including sex-specific mortality data at one year. Moreover, due to insufficient studies, many of our planned methods were not implemented. In particular, we were unable to conduct assessments of heterogeneity or publication bias or subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is uncertain about sex (being male or female) as an independent prognostic factor for predicting mortality in adults with PE. We found that, for female patients with PE, there is likely a small but clinically important reduction in all-cause mortality at 30 days relative to male patients. However, this result should be interpreted cautiously, as the remaining review outcomes do not point to an association between being female and having a lower risk of death. In fact, the evidence in the review also suggested that, in female patients, there may be a small but clinically important increase in all-cause hospital mortality. It also showed that there may be little to no difference in PE-related mortality at 30 days between male and female patients. There is currently no study evidence from longitudinal studies for our other review outcomes. Although the available evidence is conflicting and therefore cannot support a recommendation for or against routinely considering sex to quantify prognosis or to guide personalised therapeutic approaches for patients with PE, this Cochrane review offers information to guide future primary research and systematic reviews.

Sex Differences in Cardiovascular Adaptations Following Aerobic Exercise Training Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The influence of aerobic exercise training on cardiovascular adaptations in healthy males vs. females is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis summarized sex-based differences in cardiac adaptations following aerobic exercise training interventions in healthy adults.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2024. Cardiac adaptation data included peak oxygen uptake, heart rate, arteriovenous oxygen difference, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, stroke volume, cardiac output, left ventricular (LV) mass, LV end diastolic volume (LVEDV), LV end systolic volume (LVESV), and LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Meta-analyses were conducted in RevMan 5.4.

RESULTS

Meta-analyses were conducted on 4 outcomes: LV mass, LVEDV, LVESV, and LVEF. The meta-analysis revealed no sex differences in LV mass (standardized mean difference = -0.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.29, 0.27, P = 0.97), LVESV (mean difference [MD] = 1.85, 95% CI: -3.45, 7.10, P = 0.5), or LVEF (MD = -0.9, 95% CI: -3.26, 1.46, P = 0.45) following aerobic exercise interventions. Meta-analyses revealed a sex difference in LVEDV: males show a greater improvement in LVEDV (MD = 7.67, 95% CI: 2.75, 12.59, P = 0.002) than females after aerobic exercise training. No other sex differences were observed in any of the other outcomes. The overall risk of bias was low, and the quality of evidence was moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Aerobic exercise interventions were associated with a larger increase in LVEDV in men relative to women, yet no sex differences were found in cardiac morphology (LV mass) or functional indices (LVEF).

A deeper consideration of sex/gender in quantitative health research: a checklist for incorporating multidimensionality, variety, embodiment, and intersectionality throughout the whole research process

BACKGROUND

There is a growing awareness of the need to adequately integrate sex and gender into health-related research. Although it is widely known that the entangled dimensions sex/gender are not comprehensively considered in most studies to date, current publications of conceptual considerations and guidelines often only give recommendations for certain stages of the research process and - to the best of our knowledge - there is a lack of a detailed guidance that accompanies each step of the entire research process. The interdisciplinary project "Integrating gender into environmental health research" (INGER) aimed to fill this gap by developing a comprehensive checklist that encourages sex/gender transformative research at all stages of the research process of quantitative health research. In the long term this contributes to a more sex/gender-equitable research.

METHODS

The checklist builds on current guidelines on sex/gender in health-related research. Starting from important key documents, publications from disciplines involved in INGER were collected. Furthermore, we used a snowball method to include further relevant titles. The identification of relevant publications was continued until saturation was reached. 55 relevant publications published between 2000 and 2021 were identified, assessed, summarised and included in the developed checklist. After noticing that most publications did not cover every step of the research process and often considered sex/gender in a binary way, the recommendations were modified and enriched based on the authors' expertise to cover every research step and to add further categories to the binary sex/gender categories.

RESULTS

The checklist comprises 67 items in 15 sections for integrating sex/gender in quantitative health-related research and addresses aspects of the whole research process of planning, implementing and analysing quantitative health studies as well as aspects of appropriate language, communication of results to the scientific community and the public, and research team composition.

CONCLUSION

The developed comprehensive checklist goes beyond a binary consideration of sex/gender and thus enables sex/gender-transformative research. Although the project INGER focused on environmental health research, no aspects that were specific to this research area were identified in the checklist. The resulting comprehensive checklist can therefore be used in different quantitative health-related research fields.

Building living systematic reviews and reporting standards for comparative microscopic analysis of white diseases in hard corals

Over the last 4 decades, coral disease research has continued to provide reports of diseases, the occurrence and severity of disease outbreaks and associated disease signs. Histology using systematic protocols is a gold standard for the microscopic assessment of diseases in veterinary and medical research, while also providing valuable information on host condition. However, uptake of histological analysis for coral disease remains limited. Increasing disease outbreaks on coral reefs as human impacts intensify highlights a need to understand the use of histology to date in coral disease research. Here, we apply a systematic approach to collating, mapping and reviewing histological methods used to study coral diseases with 'white' signs (i.e., white diseases) in hard coral taxa and map research effort in this field spanning study design, sample processing and analysis in the 33 publications identified between 1984 and 2022. We find that studies to date have not uniformly detailed methodologies, and terminology associated with reporting and disease description is inconsistent between studies. Combined these limitations reduce study repeatability, limiting the capacity for researchers to compare disease reports. A primary outcome of this study is the provision of transparent and repeatable protocols for systematically reviewing literature associated with white diseases of hard coral taxa, and development of recommendations for standardised reporting procedures with the aim of increasing uptake of histology in addition to allowing for ongoing comparative analysis through living systematic reviews for the coral disease field.

Achieving Equity in EMS Care and Patient Outcomes Through Quality Management Systems: A Position Statement

Improving health and safety in our communities requires deliberate focus and commitment to equity. Inequities are differences in access, treatment, and outcomes between individuals and across populations that are systemic, avoidable, and unjust. Within health care in general, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS) in particular, there are demonstrated inequities in the quality of care provided to patients based on a number of characteristics linked to discrimination, exclusion, or bias. Given the critical role that EMS plays within the health care system, it is imperative that EMS systems reduce inequities by delivering evidence-based, high-quality care for the communities and patients we serve. To achieve equity in EMS care delivery and patient outcomes, the National Association of EMS Physicians recommends that EMS systems and agencies:make health equity a strategic priority and commit to improving equity at all levels.assess and monitor clinical and safety quality measures through the lens of inequities as an integrated part of the quality management process.ensure that data elements are structured to enable equity analysis at every level and routinely evaluate data for limitations hindering equity analysis and improvement.involve patients and community stakeholders in determining data ownership and stewardship to ensure its ongoing evolution and fitness for use for measuring care inequities.address biases as they translate into the quality of care and standards of respect for patients.pursue equity through a framework rooted in the principles of improvement science.

Sex-Specific Association of Alcohol Use Disorder With Suicide Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Despite individual studies suggesting that sex differences exist in the association between alcohol use disorder (AUD) and suicide, most existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses have reported associations across the sexes.

Objective

To estimate the sex-specific association between AUD and suicide mortality.

Data Sources

Embase, MEDLINE (including MEDLINE In-Process), PsycINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched from database inception to April 27, 2022.

Study Selection

Inclusion criteria consisted of the following: (1) original, quantitative study, (2) inclusion of a measure of association and its corresponding measure of variability (or sufficient data to calculate these [eg, 95% CI]), and (3) results stratified by sex.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data extraction was completed by one reviewer and then cross-checked by a second reviewer. Risk of bias was assessed by study design. Categorical random-effects meta-analyses were conducted to obtain sex-specific pooled estimates of the association between AUD and suicide mortality risk. Methodological moderators (ie, study design and comparator group) were assessed using sex-stratified meta-regressions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The association between AUD and suicide mortality.

Results

A total of 16 347 unique records were identified in the systematic search; 24 studies were ultimately included for 37 870 699 participants (59.7% male and 40.3% female) (23 risk estimates for male and 17 for female participants). Participants ranged in age from 15 years to 65 years or older. Sex-specific meta-regression models indicated that study design (ie, longitudinal vs cross-sectional study design) affected the observed association between AUD and suicide mortality for both male participants (log odds ratio, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.08-1.28]; P = .03) and female participants (log odds ratio, 1.41 [95% CI, 0.57-2.24]; P < .001). For males and females, among longitudinal studies, the pooled odds ratios were 2.68 (95% CI, 1.86-3.87; I2 = 99% [n = 14]) and 2.39 (95% CI, 1.50-3.81; I2 = 90% [n = 11]), respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review and meta-analysis yielded substantive evidence that AUD was associated with suicide mortality and that the association was similar across the sexes. The findings underscore the importance of identifying and treating AUD as part of a comprehensive suicide prevention strategy.

"What's Sex and Gender Got to Do With It?" A Scoping Review of Sex- and Gender-Based Analysis in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies of Medication Adherence

OBJECTIVES

Medication taking is a complex multidimensional behavior that may be impeded by a range of biological and psychosocial factors, including sex and gender. We aimed to synthesize how sex and gender have been reported and analyzed in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of medication.

METHODS

We searched for English-language peer-reviewed articles of observational studies (eg, cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control) that examined medication adherence among adults and included sex or gender in their reporting.

RESULTS

We included 937 studies among 530 537 287 participants published between the year 1979 and 2021. Most studies were cross-sectional (47%), lasted ≤ 1 year (35%), examined self-reported adherence (53%), did not assess specific adherence problem(s) (40%), and included medications for cardiovascular conditions (24%) or systemic infections (24%). A quarter of studies (25%) used sex and gender interchangeably, more than one third of studies (36%) that reported gender data likely collected data on sex, and < 1% of studies described sex and gender as distinct variables. Studies of cisgender participants more often reported that females/women experienced greater adherence problems often than males/men (31% vs 20%), particularly discontinuation and cost-related nonadherence. Only 21 studies (2%) reported on transgender individuals, and these predominantly examined antiretroviral medications for HIV.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review revealed substantial conflation of sex and gender in studies of medication adherence and a paucity of research among transgender individuals. Moreover, our synthesis showed sex/gender disparities in medication taking with studies reporting greater medication adherence problems among cisgender women and transgender participants than cisgender men.

Occupational Health Applied Infodemiological Studies of Nutritional Diseases and Disorders: Scoping Review with Meta-Analysis

(1) Objective: to identify and review existing infodemiological studies on nutritional disorders applied to occupational health and to analyse the effect of the intervention on body mass index (BMI) or alternatively body weight (BW); (2) Methods: This study involved a critical analysis of articles retrieved from MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Latin American, and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and Medicina en Español (MEDES) using the descriptors "Nutrition Disorders, "Occupational Health" and "Infodemiology", applying the filters "Humans" and "Adult: 19+ years". The search was conducted on 29 May 2021; (3) Results: a total of 357 references were identified from the bibliographic database searches; after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 11 valid studies were obtained for the review. Interventions could be categorised into (1) interventions related to lifestyle, physical activity, and dietary changes through education programmes, (2) interventions associated with lifestyle, physical activity, and dietary changes through the use of telemonitoring systems or self-help applications, (3) interventions tied to lifestyle, physical activity, and dietary changes through control and/or social network support groups, and (4) interventions linked to changes in the work environment, including behavioural change training and work environment training tasks. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the heterogeneity present when analysing the results for BMI was 72% (p < 0.01), which decreased to 0% (p = 0.57) when analysing the outcomes for weight, in which case the null hypothesis of homogeneity could be accepted. In all instances, the final summary of the effect was on the decreasing side for both BMI and BW; (4) Conclusions: Despite the high heterogeneity of the results reported, the trend shown in all cases indicates that the intervention methodologies implemented by empowering individuals through Web 2.0 technologies are positive in terms of the problem of overweight. Further implementation of novel strategies to support individuals is needed to overcome obesity, and, at least in the early studies, these strategies seem to be making the necessary change.

Let's talk about sex (and gender) after ACL injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of self-reported activity and knee-related outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Investigate sex/gender differences in self-reported activity and knee-related outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury.

DESIGN

Systematic review with meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Seven databases were searched in December 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Observational or interventional studies with self-reported activity (including return to sport) or knee-related outcomes after ACL injury.

RESULTS

We included 242 studies (n=123 687, 43% females/women/girls, mean age 26 years at surgery). One hundred and six studies contributed to 1 of 35 meta-analyses (n=59 552). After ACL injury/reconstruction, very low-certainty evidence suggests females/women/girls had inferior self-reported activity (ie, return to sport, Tegner Activity Score, Marx Activity Scale) compared with males/men/boys on most (88%, 7/8) meta-analyses. Females/women/girls had 23%-25% reduced odds of returning to sport within 1-year post-ACL injury/reconstruction (12 studies, OR 0.76 95% CI 0.63 to 0.92), 1-5 years (45 studies, OR 0.75 95% CI 0.69 to 0.82) and 5-10 years (9 studies, OR 0.77 95% CI 0.57 to 1.04). Age-stratified analysis (<19 years) suggests female athletes/girls had 32% reduced odds of returning to sport compared with male athletes/boys (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.13, I² 0.0%). Very low-certainty evidence suggests females/women/girls experienced inferior knee-related outcomes (eg, function, quality of life) on many (70%, 19/27) meta-analyses: standardised mean difference ranging from -0.02 (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, KOOS-activities of daily living, 9 studies, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.02) to -0.31 (KOOS-sport and recreation, 7 studies, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Very low-certainty evidence suggests inferior self-reported activity and knee-related outcomes for females/women/girls compared with males/men/boys after an ACL injury. Future studies should explore factors and design targeted interventions to improve outcomes for females/women/girls.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021205998.

Gender dimension in cardio-pulmonary continuum

Cardio-pulmonary diseases, which were once regarded as a man's illness, have been one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality for both men and women in many countries in recent years. Both gender and sex influence the functional and structural changes in the human body and therefore play an important role in disease clinical manifestation, treatment choice, and/or response to treatment and prognosis of health outcomes. The gender dimension integrates sex and gender analysis in health sciences and medical research, however, it is still relatively overlooked suggesting the need for empowerment in the medical research community. Latest advances in the field of cardiovascular research have provided supportive evidence that the application of biological variables of sex has led to the understanding that heart disease in females may have different pathophysiology compared to males, particularly in younger adults. It has also resulted in new diagnostic techniques and a better understanding of symptomatology, while gender analysis has informed more appropriate risk stratification and prevention strategies. The existing knowledge in the pulmonary field shows the higher prevalence of pulmonary disorders among females, however, the role of gender as a socio-cultural construct has yet to be explored for the implementation of targeted interventions. The purpose of this review is to introduce the concept of gender dimension and its importance for the cardiopulmonary continuum with a focus on shared pathophysiology and disease presentation in addition to interrelation with chronic kidney disease. The review presents basic knowledge of what gender dimension means, and the application of sex and gender aspects in cardiovascular medicine with a specific focus on early pulmonary development, pulmonary hypertension, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Early vascular aging and inflammation have been presented as a potential pathophysiological link, with further interactions between the cardiopulmonary continuum and chronic kidney disease. Finally, implications for potential future research have been provided to increase the impact of gender dimension on research excellence that would add value to everybody, foster toward precision medicine and ultimately improve human health.

Sex and Gender Appraisal Tool-Systematic Reviews-2 and Participation-To-Prevalence Ratio assessed to whom the evidence applies in sepsis reviews

OBJECTIVES

To revise a sex and gender appraisal tool for systematic reviews (SGAT-SR) and apply it to Cochrane sepsis reviews.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

The revision process was informed by existing literature on sex, gender, intersectionality, and feedback from an expert advisory board. We revised the items to consider additional factors associated with health inequities and appraised sex and gender considerations using the SGAT-SR-2 and female Participation-to-Prevalence Ratio (PPR) in Cochrane sepsis reviews.

RESULTS

SGAT-SR-2 consists of 19 questions appraising the review's sections and use of the terms sex and gender. amongst 71 SRs assessed, 50.7% included at least one tool item, the most frequent being the number of participants by sex or gender at included study-level (24/71 reviews). Only four reviews provided disaggregated data for the full set of included trials, while two considered other equity-related factors. Reviews rarely appraised possible similarities and differences across sex and gender. In half of a subset of reviews, female participants were under-represented relative to their share of the sepsis population (PPR<0.8).

CONCLUSION

The SGAT-SR-2 tool and the PPR can support the design and appraisal of systematic reviews to assess sex and gender considerations, address to whom evidence applies, and determine future research needs.

Sex/Gender-Differences in the Health Effects of Environmental Noise Exposure on Hypertension and Ischemic Heart Disease-A Systematic Review

Previous studies have demonstrated cardiovascular health effects of environmental noise exposure, partly showing different effect estimates for males and females. This cannot be explained by biological differences between males and females alone. It is assumed that health outcomes and exposure patterns also depend on gender, determined by social, economic, and cultural factors in society. This systematic review evaluated the current state of how sex/gender is integrated in studies on environmental noise associated with hypertension, blood pressure, and ischemic heart diseases. A systematic literature search was conducted in three different databases, identifying thirty studies published between 1 January 2000 and 2 February 2020. Effects varied, with no consistent findings for both males and females. All studies used a binary operationalization of sex/gender, assuming static differences between males and females. The differentiation between biological and social dimensions of sex/gender was not present in any of the studies and the terms “sex” and “gender” were used interchangeably. However, biological and social dimensions of sex/gender were unconsciously taken up in the discussion of the results. Integrating sex/gender-theoretical concepts into future studies offers great potential to increase the validity of research findings, thus making them more useful for prevention efforts, health promotion, and health care.

Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted interventions, improve evidence quality and redress health inequities. A first step is correct use of terms. We therefore assessed sex and gender terminology in SDM intervention studies.

Materials and methods

We performed a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review of SDM interventions. We extracted study characteristics and their use of sex, gender or related terms (mention; number of categories). We assessed correct use of sex and gender terms using three criteria: “non-binary use”, “use of appropriate categories” and “non-interchangeable use of sex and gender”. We computed the proportion of studies that met all, any or no criteria, and explored associations between criteria met and study characteristics.

Results

Of 87 included studies, 58 (66.7%) mentioned sex and/or gender. The most mentioned related terms were “female” (60.9%) and “male” (59.8%). Of the 58 studies, authors used sex and gender as binary variables respectively in 36 (62%) and in 34 (58.6%) studies. No study met the criterion “non-binary use”. Authors used appropriate categories to describe sex and gender respectively in 28 (48.3%) and in 8 (13.8%) studies. Of the 83 (95.4%) studies in which sex and/or gender, and/or related terms were mentioned, authors used sex and gender non-interchangeably in 16 (19.3%). No study met all three criteria. Criteria met did not vary according to study characteristics (p>.05).

Conclusions

In SDM implementation studies, sex and gender terms and concepts are in a state of confusion. Our results suggest the urgency of adopting a standardized use of sex and gender terms and concepts before these considerations can be properly integrated into implementation research.

A Sex/Gender Perspective on Interventions to Reduce Sedentary Behaviour in Girls and Boys: Results of the genEffects Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to evaluate the extent of sex/gender consideration and effectiveness of interventions designed to reduce sedentary behaviour (SB). We searched for randomised or non-randomised controlled trials with the outcome SB and a sex/gender analysis in eleven electronic databases. Sixty-seven studies were included. Sex/gender considerations were qualitatively rated. Sex/gender was reported separately in 44.8% of studies, 14.9% of studies conducted a sex/gender interaction analysis, and 19.4% enrolled either girls or boys. SB was significantly reduced for girls in 16.4%, for boys in 11.9% and for both in 13.4%. No sex/gender intervention effect was found in 38.8%. According to the qualitative rating, studies without significant sex/gender effects reached "detailed" rating twice as often as studies finding a significant intervention effect for either girls or boys, or both. Overall, no clear pattern according to the qualitative rating and in terms of intervention effectiveness can be drawn. The results reveal a lack of sufficient sex/gender information in intervention planning and delivery. Further research should consider analysing sex/gender intervention effects as well as consider sex/gender inclusive intervention planning and delivery.

Words Matter: Sex and Gender as Unique Variables in Research

Sex and gender are not equivalent concepts, even though these 2 variables are often used interchangeably by researchers. The precise use of variables is critical to ensure that research and theoretical work is of the highest quality. This article defines sex and gender and the importance of recognizing both of these variables as being unique and then demonstrates the benefit of measuring both of these variables using the cardiovascular disease literature as an exemplar. Additionally, recommendations for scholars regarding the use of sex and gender in the research and theoretical literature are provided.

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study

BACKGROUND

Healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) are common and increase morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. Their control continues to be an unresolved issue worldwide. HAIs epidemiology shows sex/gender differences. Thus the lack of consideration of sex/gender in Cochrane reviews will limit their applicability and capacity to support informed decisions. This study aims to describe the extent to which Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs consider sex and gender.

METHODS

Methodology study appraising Cochrane reviews of interventions to prevent HAIs.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from 1995 (launch of the journal) to 31 December 2016. Two authors independently extracted data with EPPI-Reviewer 4 software, and independently appraised the sex/gender content of the reviews with the Sex and Gender Appraisal Tool for Systematic Reviews (SGAT-SR).

RESULTS

This study included 113 reviews assessing the effects of interventions for preventing HAIs. 100 reviews (88%) used at least one sex or gender-related term. The terminology used was heterogeneous, being "sex" the term used in more reviews (51%). No review defined neither sex nor gender. Thus we could not assess the definitions provided. Consideration of sex and gender was practically absent in the included reviews; in fact, no review met all the applicable items of the SGAT-SR, and 51 reviews (50%) fulfilled no item. No review provided a complete description of the sex and the gender of the samples of the included studies. Only ten reviews (10%) planned to perform sex- and gender-based analysis and only three (3%) could complete the analysis. The method chosen was always the subgroup analysis based on sex (one review) or gender (two reviews). Three reviews (3%) considered sex or gender-related findings in the conclusions.

CONCLUSION

Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing HAIs was practically absent. This lack of attention to sex and gender reduces the quality of Cochrane reviews, and their applicability for all people: women and men, boys and girls, and people of diverse gender identities. Cochrane should attempt to address the shortfalls detected.

Interventions on children's and adolescents' physical activity and sedentary behaviour: protocol for a systematic review from a sex/gender perspective

BACKGROUND

Low levels of physical activity (PA) and high levels of sedentary behaviour (SB) have been observed in young people. Both behaviours are detrimental for health with patterns tending to continue into adulthood. There is sustained value in establishing health habits in early years. Even though levels of SB and participation in PA differ among boys and girls, and the effectiveness of interventions to promote PA and/or prevent sedentary behaviours varies by sex/gender to date, sex/gender in systematic reviews is not yet widely considered. Additionally, while tools have been proposed, there is no consensus on the criteria to assess sex/gender in systematic reviews in the context of health promotion. The main objectives of this systematic review are to evaluate the effects of interventions on girls' and boys' PA and SB and to appraise the extent to which the studies have taken sex/gender into account.

METHODS

Eleven electronic databases will be searched to identify all relevant (randomized) controlled trials. Two independent reviewers will screen studies, extract data and appraise the quality of studies. The main outcome of the studies will be a quantified measure of PA and/or SB. Risk of bias of individual studies will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for RCTs. Meta-analyses will be conducted when possible among studies with sufficient homogeneity. To evaluate sex/gender considerations in primary studies, we will use a sex/gender checklist that builds on existing tools and was developed during a 2-day, iterative process among a multidisciplinary panel of 16 experts. The GRADE framework will be used to evaluate evidence across studies for each main efficacy outcome.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, our systematic review will be the first to analyse how sex/gender is considered in interventions promoting PA and/or reducing SB in children and adolescents in detail. The review will provide information on how sex/gender aspects have been considered in recent research and the extent to which sex/gender might impact study outcomes. Our findings will be of interest to stakeholders, health promoters, researchers and policy makers who wish to support more equal outcomes from interventions promoting PA and/or reducing SB.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018109528 .

Toward a theory-led metaframework for considering socioeconomic health inequalities within systematic reviews

OBJECTIVES

To develop a theory-led framework to inform reviewers' understanding of what, how, and why health care interventions may lead to differential effects across socioeconomic groups.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A metaframework approach combined two theoretical perspectives (socioeconomic health inequalities and complex interventions) into a single framework to inform socioeconomic health inequality considerations in systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Four theories relating to complexity within systematic reviews and 16 health inequalities intervention theories informed the development of a metaframework. Factors relating to the type of intervention, implementation, context, participant response, and mechanisms associated with differential effects across socioeconomic groups were identified. The metaframework can inform; reviewer discussions around how socioeconomic status (SES) can moderate intervention effectiveness during question formulation, approaches to data extraction and help identify a priori analysis considerations.

CONCLUSION

The metaframework offers a transparent, practical, theory-led approach to inform a program theory for what, how, and why interventions work for different SES groups in systematic reviews. It can enhance existing guidance on conducting systematic reviews that consider health inequalities, increase awareness of how SES can moderate intervention effectiveness, and encourage a greater engagement with theory throughout the review process.

Sex/gender reporting and analysis in Campbell and Cochrane systematic reviews: a cross-sectional methods study

BACKGROUND

The importance of sex and gender considerations in research is being increasingly recognized. Evidence indicates that sex and gender can influence intervention effectiveness. We assessed the extent to which sex/gender is reported and analyzed in Campbell and Cochrane systematic reviews.

METHODS

We screened all the systematic reviews in the Campbell Library (n = 137) and a sample of systematic reviews from 2016 to 2017 in the Cochrane Library (n = 674). We documented the frequency of sex/gender terms used in each section of the reviews.

RESULTS

We excluded 5 Cochrane reviews because they were withdrawn or published and updated within the same time period as well as 4 Campbell reviews and 114 Cochrane reviews which only included studies focused on a single sex. Our analysis includes 133 Campbell reviews and 555 Cochrane reviews. We assessed reporting of sex/gender considerations for each section of the systematic review (Abstract, Background, Methods, Results, Discussion). In the methods section, 83% of Cochrane reviews (95% CI 80-86%) and 51% of Campbell reviews (95% CI 42-59%) reported on sex/gender. In the results section, less than 30% of reviews reported on sex/gender. Of these, 37% (95% CI 29-45%) of Campbell and 75% (95% CI 68-82%) of Cochrane reviews provided a descriptive report of sex/gender and 63% (95% CI 55-71%) of Campbell reviews and 25% (95% CI 18-32%) of Cochrane reviews reported analytic approaches for exploring sex/gender, such as subgroup analyses, exploring heterogeneity, or presenting disaggregated data by sex/gender.

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that sex/gender reporting in Campbell and Cochrane reviews is inadequate.

[Barriers and facilitators for the development of sex/gender sensitive clinical practice guidelines: A qualitative interview study]

INTRODUCTION

Sex and gender health research evaluates biological and psychosocial differences between women and men which can influence the development, progress and experience of diseases. However, despite the increasing body of evidence about relevant differences between women and men regarding healthcare, the prevention, management and treatment of many common diseases do not yet reflect the knowledge of sex/gender characteristics. Furthermore, in the development of clinical practice guidelines, which are a valuable tool for knowledge transfer between scientific evidence and healthcare, sex/gender factors are only rarely explicitly and systematically considered. The goal of the current study therefore is to identify barriers and facilitators for the consideration and integration of sex/gender differences into guidelines, to create a basis for potential solutions and tools to increase the development of sex/gender sensitive guidelines in the future.

METHODS

Barriers and facilitators for the development of sex/gender sensitive guidelines were identified by conducting semi-structured interviews with twelve experts in national and international guideline development (guideline authors and coordinators), as well as gender experts (female: n=8). The selection of experts followed a purposeful sampling strategy and the interview data was analyzed using the qualitative content analysis according to Mayring.

RESULTS

The views on barriers and facilitators were allocated to and summarized in five categories with ten subcategories. The identified barriers mainly addressed the increasing complexity of guidelines, the lack of availability and quality of sex/gender sensitive evidence, and the shortage of resources. In addition, barriers were identified in an individual/professional context, such as deficiencies in awareness/knowledge about relevant sex/gender differences. The results of facilitating factors showed that experts see political policies and standards from guideline organizations as support for the consideration of sex/gender factors in guideline development.

CONCLUSION

The perspective of experts illustrates that besides organizational and political inventions, individual and social factors should also be addressed in order to achieve behavioral change.

Treatment of Depression in Women

Women are more likely than men to experience depression throughout the life span. Sex differences in neurochemistry and brain structure, as well as societal factors may contribute to women's increased likelihood of depression. Pharmacological research targeting depression has historically excluded women, leading to a knowledge gap regarding effective antidepressant treatment in women. Antidepressant pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics are clearly different in men and women, necessitating a thoughtful approach to their prescription and management. Hormone changes associated with the menstrual cycle, pregnancy, and menopause also contribute to differences in depression and effective antidepressant use in women. Finally, it is important to consider potential interactions between antidepressant drugs and medications specifically used by women (oral contraceptives, tamoxifen, and estrogen).

Implementation Strategies for Gender-Sensitive Public Health Practice: A European Workshop

OBJECTIVES

Providing a robust scientific background for the focus on gender-sensitive public health and a systematic approach to its implementation.

METHODS

Within the FP7-EUGenMed project ( http://eugenmed.eu ) a workshop on sex and gender in public health was convened on February 2-3, 2015. The experts participated in moderated discussion rounds to (1) assemble available knowledge and (2) identify structural influences on practice implementation. The findings were summarized and analyzed in iterative rounds to define overarching strategies and principles.

RESULTS

The participants discussed the rationale for implementing gender-sensitive public health and identified priorities and key stakeholders to engage in the process. Communication strategies and specific promotion strategies with distinct stakeholders were defined. A comprehensive list of gender-sensitive practices was established using the recently published taxonomy of the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change (ERIC) project as a blueprint.

CONCLUSIONS

A clearly defined implementation strategy should be mandated for all new projects in the field of gender-sensitive public health. Our tool can support researchers and practitioners with the analysis of current and past research as well as with the planning of new projects.

Essential metrics for assessing sex & gender integration in health research proposals involving human participants

Integrating sex and gender in health research is essential to produce the best possible evidence to inform health care. Comprehensive integration of sex and gender requires considering these variables from the very beginning of the research process, starting at the proposal stage. To promote excellence in sex and gender integration, we have developed a set of metrics to assess the quality of sex and gender integration in research proposals. These metrics are designed to assist both researchers in developing proposals and reviewers in making funding decisions. We developed this tool through an iterative three-stage method involving 1) review of existing sex and gender integration resources and initial metrics design, 2) expert review and feedback via anonymous online survey (Likert scale and open-ended questions), and 3) analysis of feedback data and collective revision of the metrics. We received feedback on the initial metrics draft from 20 reviewers with expertise in conducting sex- and/or gender-based health research. The majority of reviewers responded positively to questions regarding the utility, clarity and completeness of the metrics, and all reviewers provided responses to open-ended questions about suggestions for improvements. Coding and analysis of responses identified three domains for improvement: clarifying terminology, refining content, and broadening applicability. Based on this analysis we revised the metrics into the Essential Metrics for Assessing Sex and Gender Integration in Health Research Proposals Involving Human Participants, which outlines criteria for excellence within each proposal component and provides illustrative examples to support implementation. By enhancing the quality of sex and gender integration in proposals, the metrics will help to foster comprehensive, meaningful integration of sex and gender throughout each stage of the research process, resulting in better quality evidence to inform health care for all.

Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006-2014

BACKGROUND

During the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research practice. The aim of this study is to provide good practice examples of sex/gender sensitive health research.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search of research articles published in JECH between 2006 and 2014. An instrument was constructed to evaluate sex/gender sensitivity in four stages of the research process (background, study design, statistical analysis, discussion).

RESULTS

In total, 37 articles covering diverse topics were included. Thereof, 22 were evaluated as good practice example in at least one stage; two articles achieved highest ratings across all stages. Good examples of the background referred to available knowledge on sex/gender differences and sex/gender informed theoretical frameworks. Related to the study design, good examples calculated sample sizes to be able to detect sex/gender differences, selected sex/gender sensitive outcome/exposure indicators, or chose different cut-off values for male and female participants. Good examples of statistical analyses used interaction terms with sex/gender or different shapes of the estimated relationship for men and women. Examples of good discussions interpreted their findings related to social and biological explanatory models or questioned the statistical methods used to detect sex/gender differences.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified good practice examples may inspire researchers to critically reflect on the relevance of sex/gender issues of their studies and help them to translate methodological recommendations of sex/gender sensitivity into research practice.

"I would have preferred more options": accounting for non-binary youth in health research

As a research team focused on vulnerable youth, we increasingly need to find ways to acknowledge non-binary genders in health research. Youth have become more vocal about expanding notions of gender beyond traditional categories of boy/man and girl/woman. Integrating non-binary identities into established research processes is a complex undertaking in a culture that often assumes gender is a binary variable. In this article, we present the challenges at every stage of the research process and questions we have asked ourselves to consider non-binary genders in our work. As researchers, how do we interrogate the assumptions that have made non-binary lives invisible? What challenges arise when attempting to transform research practices to incorporate non-binary genders? Why is it crucial that researchers consider these questions at each step of the research process? We draw on our own research experiences to highlight points of tensions and possibilities for change. Improving access to inclusive health-care for non-binary people, and non-binary youth in particular, is part of creating a more equitable healthcare system. We argue that increased and improved access to inclusive health-care can be supported by research that acknowledges and includes people of all genders.

Searching for sex- and gender-sensitive tuberculosis research in public health: finding a needle in a haystack

Despite broadening consideration of sex- and gender-based issues in health research, when seeking information on how sex and gender contribute to disease contexts for specific health or public health topics, a lack of consistent or systematic use of terminology in health literature means that it remains difficult to identify research with a sex or gender focus. These inconsistencies are driven, in part, by the complexity and terminological inflexibility of the indexing systems for gender- and sex-related terms in public health databases. Compounding the issue are authors’ diverse vocabularies, and in some cases lack of accuracy in defining and using fundamental sex–gender terms in writing, and when establishing keyword lists and search criteria. Considering the specific case of the tuberculosis (TB) prevention and management literature, an analysis of sex and gender sensitivity in three health databases was performed. While there is an expanding literature exploring the roles of both sex and gender in the trajectory and lived experience of TB, we demonstrate the potential to miss relevant research when attempting to retrieve literature using only the search criteria currently available. We, therefore, argue that for good clinical practice to be achieved; there is a need for both public health researchers and users to be better educated in appropriate usage of the terminology associated with sex and gender. In addition, public health database indexers ought to accept the task of developing and implementing adequate definitions of sex and gender terms so as to facilitate access to sex- and gender-related research. These twin advances will allow clinicians to more readily recognize and access knowledge pertaining to systems of redress that respond to gendered risks that compound existing health inequalities in disease management and control, particularly when dealing with already complex diseases. Given the methodological and linguistic challenges presented by the multidimensional and highly contextual nature of definitions of sex and gender, it will be important that this review task be undertaken using a multidisciplinary approach.

Consideration of health inequalities in systematic reviews: a mapping review of guidance

BACKGROUND

Given that we know that interventions shown to be effective in improving the health of a population may actually widen the health inequalities gap while others reduce it, it is imperative that all systematic reviewers consider how the findings of their reviews may impact (reduce or increase) on the health inequality gap. This study reviewed existing guidance on incorporating considerations of health inequalities in systematic reviews in order to examine the extent to which they can help reviewers to incorporate such issues.

METHODS

A mapping review was undertaken to identify guidance documents that purported to inform reviewers on whether and how to incorporate considerations of health inequalities. Searches were undertaken in Medline, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library Methodology Register. Review guidance manuals prepared by international organisations engaged in undertaking systematic reviews, and their associated websites were scanned. Studies were included if they provided an overview or discussed the development and testing of guidance for dealing with the incorporation of considerations of health inequalities in evidence synthesis. Results are summarised in narrative and tabular forms.

RESULTS

Twenty guidance documents published between 2009 and 2016 were included. Guidance has been produced to inform considerations of health inequalities at different stages of the systematic review process. The Campbell and Cochrane Equity Group have been instrumental in developing and promoting such guidance. Definitions of health inequalities and guidance differed across the included studies. All but one guidance document were transparent in their method of production. Formal methods of evaluation were reported for six guidance documents. Most of the guidance was operationalised in the form of examples taken from published systematic reviews. The number of guidance items to operationalise ranges from 3 up to 26 with a considerable overlap noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Adhering to the guidance will require more work for the reviewers. It requires a deeper understanding of how reviewers can operationalise the guidance taking into consideration the barriers and facilitators involved. This has implications not only for understanding the usefulness and burden of the guidance but also for the uptake of guidance and its ultimate goal of improving health inequalities considerations in systematic reviews.

Why sex and gender matter in implementation research

BACKGROUND

There has been a recent swell in activity by health research funding organizations and science journal editors to increase uptake of sex and gender considerations in study design, conduct and reporting in order to ensure that research results apply to everyone. However, examination of the implementation research literature reveals that attention to sex and gender has not yet infiltrated research methods in this field.

DISCUSSION

The rationale for routinely considering sex and gender in implementation research is multifold. Sex and gender are important in decision-making, communication, stakeholder engagement and preferences for the uptake of interventions. Gender roles, gender identity, gender relations, and institutionalized gender influence the way in which an implementation strategy works, for whom, under what circumstances and why. There is emerging evidence that programme theories may operate differently within and across sexes, genders and other intersectional characteristics under various circumstances. Furthermore, without proper study, implementation strategies may inadvertently exploit or ignore, rather than transform thinking about sex and gender-related factors. Techniques are described for measuring and analyzing sex and gender in implementation research using both quantitative and qualitative methods. The present paper describes the application of methods for integrating sex and gender in implementation research. Consistently asking critical questions about sex and gender will likely lead to the discovery of positive outcomes, as well as unintended consequences. The result has potential to strengthen both the practice and science of implementation, improve health outcomes and reduce gender inequities.

Development and evaluation of 'briefing notes' as a novel knowledge translation tool to aid the implementation of sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a pilot study

Background

There is increasing recognition of sex/gender differences in health and the importance of identifying differential effects of interventions for men and women. Yet, to whom the research evidence does or does not apply, with regard to sex/gender, is often insufficiently answered. This is also true for systematic reviews which synthesize results of primary studies. A lack of analysis and reporting of evidence on sex/gender raises concerns about the applicability of systematic reviews. To bridge this gap, this pilot study aimed to translate knowledge about sex/gender analysis (SGA) into a user-friendly ‘briefing note’ format and evaluate its potential in aiding the implementation of SGA in systematic reviews.

Methods

Our Sex/Gender Methods Group used an interactive process to translate knowledge about sex/gender into briefing notes, a concise communication tool used by policy and decision makers. The briefing notes were developed in collaboration with three Cochrane Collaboration review groups (HIV/AIDS, Hypertension, and Musculoskeletal) who were also the target knowledge users of the briefing notes. Briefing note development was informed by existing systematic review checklists, literature on sex/gender, in-person and virtual meetings, and consultation with topic experts. Finally, we held a workshop for potential users to evaluate the notes.

Results

Each briefing note provides tailored guidance on considering sex/gender to reviewers who are planning or conducting systematic reviews and includes the rationale for considering sex/gender, with examples specific to each review group’s focus. Review authors found that the briefing notes provided welcome guidance on implementing SGA that was clear and concise, but also identified conceptual and implementation challenges.

Conclusions

Sex/gender briefing notes are a promising knowledge translation tool. By encouraging sex/gender analysis and equity considerations in systematic reviews, the briefing notes can assist systematic reviewers in ensuring the applicability of research evidence, with the goal of improved health outcomes for diverse populations.