Gender score development in the Berlin Aging Study II: a retrospective approach

Gender medicine: effects of sex and gender on cardiovascular disease manifestation and outcomes

Despite a growing body of evidence, the distinct contributions of biological sex and the sociocultural dimension of gender to the manifestations and outcomes of ischaemic heart disease and heart failure remain unknown. The intertwining of sex-based differences in genetic and hormonal mechanisms with the complex dimension of gender and its different components and determinants that result in different disease phenotypes in women and men needs to be elucidated. The relative contribution of purely biological factors, such as genes and hormones, to cardiovascular phenotypes and outcomes is not yet fully understood. Increasing awareness of the effects of gender has led to efforts to measure gender in retrospective and prospective clinical studies and the development of gender scores. However, the synergistic or opposing effects of sex and gender on cardiovascular traits and on ischaemic heart disease and heart failure mechanisms have not yet been systematically described. Furthermore, specific considerations of sex-related and gender-related factors in gender dysphoria or in heart-brain interactions and their association with cardiovascular disease are still lacking. In this Review, we summarize contemporary evidence on the distinct effects of sex and gender as well as of their interactions on cardiovascular disease and how they favourably or unfavourably influence the pathogenesis, clinical manifestations and treatment responses in patients with ischaemic heart disease or heart failure.

Operationalization of a multidimensional sex/gender concept for quantitative environmental health research and implementation in the KORA study: Results of the collaborative research project INGER

Background

In environmental health research, sex and gender are not yet adequately considered. There is a need to improve data collection in population-based environmental health studies by comprehensively surveying sex/gender-related aspects according to gender theoretical concepts. Thus, within the joint project INGER we developed a multidimensional sex/gender concept which we aimed to operationalize and to test the operationalization for feasibility.

Methods

In an iterative process, we created questionnaire modules which quantitatively captured the requirements of the INGER sex/gender concept. We deployed it in the KORA cohort (Cooperative Health Research in the Region of Augsburg, Germany) in 2019 and evaluated response and missing rates.

Results

The individual sex/gender self-concept was surveyed via a two-step approach that asked for sex assigned at birth and the current sex/gender identity. Additionally, we used existing tools to query internalized sex/gender roles and externalized sex/gender expressions. Adapted to the KORA population, we asked for discrimination experiences and care and household activities contributing to explain structural sex/gender relations. Further intersectionality-related social categories (e.g., socio-economic position), lifestyle and psychosocial factors were covered through data available in KORA. We could not identify appropriate tools to assess the true biological sex, sexual orientation and ethnic/cultural identity, which have yet to be developed or improved. The response-rate was 71%, the evaluation of 3,743 questionnaires showed a low missing rate. Prevalence of marginalized groups regarding sex/gender identity and definable by experiences of discrimination was very low.

Conclusion

We have shown how the multidimensional INGER sex/gender concept can be operationalized according to an European and North American understanding of sex/gender for use in quantitative research. The questionnaire modules proved feasible in an epidemiologic cohort study. Being a balancing act between theoretical concepts and its quantitative implementation our operationalization paves the way for an adequate consideration of sex/gender in environmental health research.

Operationalization and Reporting Practices in Manuscripts Addressing Gender Differences in Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Bibliographical Study

Historically, authors in the biomedical field have often conflated the terms sex and gender in their research significantly limiting the reproducibility of the reported results. In the present study, we investigated current reporting practices around gender in biomedical publications that claim the identification of "gender differences". Our systematic research identified 1117 articles for the year 2019. After random selection of 400 publications and application of inclusion criteria, 302 articles were included for analysis. Using a systematic evaluation grid, we assessed the provided methodological detail in the operationalization of gender and the provision of gender-related information throughout the manuscript. Of the 302 articles, 69 (23%) solely addressed biological sex. The remaining articles investigated gender, yet only 15 (6.5%) offered reproducible information about the operationalization of the gender dimension studied. Followingly, these manuscripts also provided more detailed gender-specific background, analyses and discussions compared to the ones not detailing the operationalization of gender. Overall, our study demonstrated persistent inadequacies in the conceptual understanding and methodological operationalization of gender in the biomedical field. Methodological rigor correlated with more nuanced and informative reporting, highlighting the need for appropriate training to increase output quality and reproducibility in the field.

The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule for the integration of sex and gender-related variables in clinical studies towards internal medicine equitable research

Biological sex and sociocultural gender matter when it comes to health and diseases. They have been both proposed as the undeniable gateways towards a personalized approach in care delivery. The Gender Working Group of the Italian Society of Internal Medicine (SIMI) was funded in 2019 with the aim of promoting good practice in the integration of sex and gender domains in clinical studies. Starting from a narrative literature review and based on regular meetings which led to a shared virtual discussion during the national SIMI congress in 2021, the members of the WG provided a core operational framework to be applied by internal medicine (IM) specialists to understand and implement their daily activity as researchers and clinicians. The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule for clinical studies has been conceptualized as follows: Who (Clinical Internal Medicine Scientists and Practitioners), What (Gender-related Variables-Gender Core Dataset), Where (Clinical Studies/Translational Research), When (Every Time It Makes Sense) and Why (Explanatory Power of Gender and Opportunities). In particular, the gender core dataset was identified by the following domains (variables to collect accordingly): relations (marital status, social support, discrimination); roles (occupation, caregiver status, household responsibility, primary earner, household dimension); institutionalized gender (education level, personal income, living in rural vs urban areas); and gender identity (validated questionnaires on personality traits). The SIMI Gender '5 Ws' Rule is a simple and easy conceptual framework that will guide IM for the design and analysis of clinical studies.

Differentiating Sex and Gender Among Older Men and Women

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to paradigmatically show the development of a gender score that can be used as either an adjustment or a matching variable to separate the effects of gender versus biological sex in a sample of older adults.

METHODS

Our sample comprised 1100 participants from the Berlin Aging Study II (52% women, mean [standard deviation] age = 75.6 [3.8] years). The gender score included a multitude of gender-related variables and was constructed via logistic regression. In models of health outcomes, it was used as an adjustment variable in regression analyses as well as a matching variable to match older men and women according to their gender.

RESULTS

Matching by gender substantially reduced sample size to n = 340. Analyses (either adjusting for gender or matching men and women according to gender) revealed that female sex was independently associated with lower grip strength (B = -14.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -15.51 to -13.44), better cognitive performance (B = 3.47, 95% CI = 1.94 to 5.0), higher pulse wave velocity (B = 0.19, 95% CI = 0.06 to 0.31), lower body mass index (B = -0.97, 95% CI = -1.74 to -0.21), and lower rates of metabolic syndrome (odds ratio = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.37 to 0.77). In addition, both sex and gender were independently associated with cognitive performance and depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Calculating a gender score allows for the inclusion of a large number of variables, creating parsimonious models that are adaptable to different data sets and alternative gender definitions. Depending on the research question and the sample properties, the gender score can be used as either an adjustment or a matching variable.Trial Registration: DRKS-Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien (Study ID: DRKS00016157).

Gender Modifies the Association of Cognition With Age-Related Hearing Impairment in the Health and Retirement Study

Introduction: Despite growing recognition of hearing loss as a risk factor for late life cognitive disorders, sex and gender analysis of this association has been limited. Elucidating this is one means to advocate for holistic medicine by considering the psychosocial attributes of people. With a composite Gender Score (GS), we aimed to assess this among aging participants (50+) from the 2016 Health and Retirement Study (HRS) cohort.

Methods: The GS was derived from gender-related variables in HRS by factor analyses and logistic regression, ranging from 0 (toward masculinity) to 100 (toward femininity). GS tertiles were also used to indicate three gender types (GS tertile 1: lower GS indicates masculinity; GS tertile 2: middle GS indicates androgyny; GS tertile 3: higher GS indicates femininity). Univariate followed by multiple logistic regressions were used to estimate the Odds Ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of cognitive impairment (assessed by adapted Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status) from hearing acuity, as well as to explore the interactions of sex and gender with hearing acuity. The risk of cognitive impairment among hearing-impaired participants was assessed using multivariable models including sex and gender as exposure variables.

Results: Five variables (taking risks, loneliness, housework, drinking, and depression) were retained to compute the GS for each participant. The distribution of GS between sexes partly overlapped. After adjusting for confounding factors, the OR for cognitive impairment associated with hearing impairment was significantly higher (OR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.26, 2.15), and this association was not modified by female sex (OR = 0.77, 95% CI: 0.46, 1.27), but by androgynous gender (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.24, 0.81). In the multivariable models for participants with hearing impairment, androgynous and feminine gender, as opposed to female sex, was associated with lower odds of cognitive impairment (OR of GS tertile 2 = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.84; OR of GS tertile 3 = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.87; OR of female sex = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.57, 1.08).

Conclusions: Hearing impairment was associated with cognitive impairment among older people, and this association may be attenuated by a more feminine GS.

Cohort profile: follow-up of a Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II) subsample as part of the GendAge study

PURPOSE

The study 'Sex- and gender-sensitive prevention of cardiovascular and metabolic disease in older adults in Germany', the GendAge study, focuses on major risk factors for cardiovascular and metabolic diseases and on the development of major outcomes from intermediate phenotypes in the context of sex and gender differences. It is based on a follow-up examination of a subsample (older group) of the Berlin Aging Study II (BASE-II).

PARTICIPANTS

The GendAge study assessments took place between 22 June 2018 and 10 March 2020. A total of 1100 participants (older BASE-II subsample, aged ≥65 years) with baseline data assessed at least by one of the BASE-II partner sites were investigated in the follow-up. These participants had a mean age of 75.6 years (SD ±3.8), with a mean follow-up at 7.4 years (SD ±1.5).

FINDINGS TO DATE

Data from different domains such as internal medicine, geriatrics, immunology and psychology were collected, with a focus on cardiometabolic diseases and in the context of sex and gender differences. Diabetes mellitus type 2 was reported by 15.6% and 8.6% of men and women, respectively. In contrast, this disease was diagnosed in 20.7% of men and 13.3% of women, indicating that a substantial proportion of almost 30% was unaware of the disease. Echocardiography revealed that left ventricular ejection fraction was higher in women than in men, in agreement with previous reports.

FUTURE PLANS

A gender questionnaire assessing sociocultural aspects implemented as part of the follow-up described here will allow to calculate a gender score and its evaluation based on the newly collected data. At the same time, the other BASE-II research foci established over the past 10 years will be continued and strengthened by the BASE-II transition into a longitudinal study with follow-up data on the older subsample.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

DRKS00016157.