ReviewBiology of sex differences2024
Training in the implementation of sex and gender research policies: an evaluation of publicly available online courses.
Review in Biology of sex differences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sex and gender considerations in randomized controlled trials in critical care nephrology: a meta-epidemiologic study.BMC medicine · 2025Pooled it
- 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
- Developmental and dynamic systems: insights for sex/gender research.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- The "sex-specific effect:" Evaluating analytical approaches to sex-dependence in the behavioral and brain sciences.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Sex/gender entanglement: A problem of knots and buckets.Biology of sex differences · 2025Review
- Navigating the paradigm shift of sex inclusive preclinical research and lessons learnt.Communications biology · 2025Article
- "Precision Medicine" and the Failed Search for Binary Brain Sex Differences to Address Gender Behavioral Health Disparities.American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council · 2025Review
- The Four Core Genotypes mouse model: evaluating the impact of a recently discovered translocation.Biology of sex differences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRecently implemented research policies requiring the inclusion of females and males have created an urgent need for effective training in how to account for sex, and in some cases gender, in biomedical studies.
methodsHere, we evaluated three sets of publicly available online training materials on this topic: (1) Integrating Sex & Gender in Health Research from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR); (2) Sex as a Biological Variable: A Primer from the United States National Institutes of Health (NIH); and (3) The Sex and Gender Dimension in Biomedical Research, developed as part of "Leading Innovative measures to reach gender Balance in Research Activities" (LIBRA) from the European Commission. We reviewed each course with respect to their coverage of (1) What is required by the policy; (2) Rationale for the policy; (3) Handling of the concepts "sex" and "gender;" (4) Research design and analysis; and (5) Interpreting and reporting data.
resultsAll three courses discussed the importance of including males and females to better generalize results, discover potential sex differences, and tailor treatments to men and women. The entangled nature of sex and gender, operationalization of sex, and potential downsides of focusing on sex more than other sources of variation were minimally discussed. Notably, all three courses explicitly endorsed invalid analytical approaches that produce bias toward false positive discoveries of difference.
conclusionsOur analysis suggests a need for revised or new training materials that incorporate four major topics: precise operationalization of sex, potential risks of over-emphasis on sex as a category, recognition of gender and sex as complex and entangled, and rigorous study design and data analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.