People who have a uterus but are not cisgender women may carry pregnancies. Unfortunately, to date, academic language surrounding pregnancy remains largely (cis) woman-centric. The exclusion of gender-diverse people in the language of pregnancy research in English is pervasive. In reviewing a random sample of 500 recent articles on pregnancy or pregnant populations across health research fields, we found that only 1.2% of articles used gender-inclusive language (none of them in epidemiology), while the remaining 98.8% used (cis) woman-centric language. First and foremost, recent recommendations highlight the need to include trans, non-binary and gender-diverse people in study design. Meanwhile, there remains a lack of awareness that all research on pregnancy can contribute to inclusiveness, including in dissemination and retroactive description. We explain how the ubiquitous use of (cis) woman-centric language in pregnancy-related research contributes to (1) the erasure of gender diversity; (2) inaccurate scientific communication and (3) negative societal impacts, such as perpetuating the use of exclusionary language by students, practitioners, clinicians, policy-makers and the media. We follow with recommendations for gender-inclusive language in every section (ie, introductions, methods, results, discussions) of epidemiological articles on pregnant populations. The erasure of gender-diverse people in the rhetoric of research about pregnant people can be addressed immediately, including in the dissemination of results from ongoing studies that did not take gender diversity into consideration. This makes gender-inclusive language a crucial first step towards the inclusion of gender-diverse people in epidemiological research on pregnant people and other health research more globally.

There is increased interest in inclusion, diversity and representativeness in epidemiological and community health research. Despite this progress, misunderstanding and conflation of sex and gender have precluded both the accurate description of sex and gender as sample demographics and their inclusion in scientific enquiry aiming to distinguish health disparities due to biological systems, gendered experiences or their social and environmental interactions. The present glossary aims to define and improve understanding of current sex-related and gender-related terminology as an important step to gender-inclusive epidemiological research. Effectively, a proper understanding of sex, gender and their subtleties as well as acknowledgement and inclusion of diverse gender identities and modalities can make epidemiology not only more equitable, but also more scientifically accurate and representative. In turn, this can improve public health efforts aimed at promoting the well-being of all communities and reducing health inequities.

Individuals who have a uterus but are not cisgender women may carry pregnancies; however, academic language around pregnancy remains largely (cis-)woman-centric. There is a dearth of data on the use of (cis-)woman-centric and gender-inclusive language alternatives in research on pregnancy. Furthermore, while the need to include trans, non-binary and gender-diverse people in all steps of the research process has been discussed in the recent scientific literature, there remains a lack of awareness in the field that all research on pregnancy can contribute to inclusiveness through language and terminology. Accordingly, we first review the recent literature to examine the state of gendered language in pregnancy-related research. Second, we discuss why gender-inclusive language should be seen as essential in pregnancy-related research. Third, we provide guidance for gender-inclusive language practices in future research on pregnancy. We reviewed 500 randomly selected publications from a search for the MeSH-major topic “pregnancy” in PubMed with a restriction for publications from the last year on July 23, 2021, human research, and the English language. This review of recent literature showed that 98.8% of publications used (cis-)woman-centric language and 1.2% used gender-inclusive language. We explain how this ubiquitous use of (cis-)woman-centric language contributes to (1) the erasure of gender diversity and (2) inaccurate scientific communication, and (3) has a societal impact, for example by being picked up by students, practitioners, clinicians, policymakers, and the media. We follow with recommendations for gender-inclusive language in every section (i.e., introductions, methods, results, discussions) of research articles on pregnancy. The erasure of gender-diverse people in the rhetoric of research about pregnant people can be addressed immediately, including in the dissemination of results from ongoing studies that did not take gender into consideration in the design phase. This makes gender-inclusive language a crucial first step towards the inclusion of gender-diverse people in health research more globally.