{"title":"将性别视为生物变量的澳大利亚医学研究:荟萃分析","authors":"Janelle Ryan, Shanie Landen, Vincent R Harley","doi":"10.1101/2024.08.23.24310791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Subjects in medical research have predominantly been male (1). Women experience 50-75% more adverse drug responses (2) resulting in withdrawn medications (3). While sex differences in metabolism, disease and treatment response are increasingly recognised, sex-informed medicine is lagging. In 2016, USAs National Institutes of Health (NIH) formulated the Sex as a Biological Variable policy (4), stating that grant recipients must consider sex in experimental design, planning, analysis and reporting of their findings. Australian data is lacking on the inclusion of both males and females as well as appropriate analysis of sex differences. We analysed the 219 Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) research articles over 2019-2023 (Box 1). We tallied when; i) both males and females were included in the study, ii) sex differences were reported and/or considered, and iii) the analysis was appropriate to support sex-related claims. We found that articles published in MJA are including males and females, however testing of sex differences is uncommon and appropriate statistical analysis is lacking. We hope that this article will bring attention to this fundamental issue and improve future efforts to investigate sex differences.","PeriodicalId":501556,"journal":{"name":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Australian medical research that considered sex as a biological variable: a meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Janelle Ryan, Shanie Landen, Vincent R Harley\",\"doi\":\"10.1101/2024.08.23.24310791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Subjects in medical research have predominantly been male (1). Women experience 50-75% more adverse drug responses (2) resulting in withdrawn medications (3). While sex differences in metabolism, disease and treatment response are increasingly recognised, sex-informed medicine is lagging. In 2016, USAs National Institutes of Health (NIH) formulated the Sex as a Biological Variable policy (4), stating that grant recipients must consider sex in experimental design, planning, analysis and reporting of their findings. Australian data is lacking on the inclusion of both males and females as well as appropriate analysis of sex differences. We analysed the 219 Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) research articles over 2019-2023 (Box 1). We tallied when; i) both males and females were included in the study, ii) sex differences were reported and/or considered, and iii) the analysis was appropriate to support sex-related claims. We found that articles published in MJA are including males and females, however testing of sex differences is uncommon and appropriate statistical analysis is lacking. We hope that this article will bring attention to this fundamental issue and improve future efforts to investigate sex differences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.23.24310791\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"medRxiv - Health Systems and Quality Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.08.23.24310791","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Australian medical research that considered sex as a biological variable: a meta-analysis
Subjects in medical research have predominantly been male (1). Women experience 50-75% more adverse drug responses (2) resulting in withdrawn medications (3). While sex differences in metabolism, disease and treatment response are increasingly recognised, sex-informed medicine is lagging. In 2016, USAs National Institutes of Health (NIH) formulated the Sex as a Biological Variable policy (4), stating that grant recipients must consider sex in experimental design, planning, analysis and reporting of their findings. Australian data is lacking on the inclusion of both males and females as well as appropriate analysis of sex differences. We analysed the 219 Medical Journal of Australia (MJA) research articles over 2019-2023 (Box 1). We tallied when; i) both males and females were included in the study, ii) sex differences were reported and/or considered, and iii) the analysis was appropriate to support sex-related claims. We found that articles published in MJA are including males and females, however testing of sex differences is uncommon and appropriate statistical analysis is lacking. We hope that this article will bring attention to this fundamental issue and improve future efforts to investigate sex differences.