Considering hormones as sex- and gender-related factors in biomedical research: Challenging false dichotomies and embracing complexity

Williams, Jennifer S.; Fattori, Michelle R.; Honeyborne, Isabella R.; Ritz, Stacey A.

doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2023.105442

Cited by 7 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 140 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The time is also ripe for other entities, beyond funding agencies, to develop resources that fill current gaps. Here, we outline four areas that have recently increased tremendously in their visibility and in which researchers have expressed clear interest [ 16 – 20 , 29 , 30 ]: (1) The precise and contextualized operationalization of sex; (2) The risks inherent in a “two sizes fit all” approach to sex-based research and clinical applications; (3) The entanglement of sex and gender; and (4) Attention to rigorous analytical approaches to sex-based data. We outline each of these below, in hopes that future course offerings, both new and revised, can incorporate these important topics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, there is now an opportunity to help ensure that sex-based research policies attain their other intended goals, namely to increase rigor and reproducibility of biomedical research and to reduce harm to women and other marginalized groups. As the transdisciplinary field of sex differences research evolves, conceptualization of both sex and gender are rapidly changing [ 16 – 19 , 29 – 31 , 33 ]. The shortcomings that we have identified in these trainings may be due in part to the fact that the materials were developed at different stages of understanding of sex and gender in research and by a wide range of contributors, each with their own level of knowledge and area of expertise.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Training in the implementation of sex and gender research policies: an evaluation of publicly available online courses

Gompers,

Olivier,

Maney

2024

Biol Sex Differ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Recently 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. Methods Here, 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. Results All 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. Conclusions Our 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.

show abstract