Cargando…

Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014

BACKGROUND: During the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research pra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jahn, Ingeborg, Börnhorst, Claudia, Günther, Frauke, Brand, Tilman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5312447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28202078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z
_version_ 1782508211132170240
author Jahn, Ingeborg
Börnhorst, Claudia
Günther, Frauke
Brand, Tilman
author_facet Jahn, Ingeborg
Börnhorst, Claudia
Günther, Frauke
Brand, Tilman
author_sort Jahn, Ingeborg
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: During the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research practice. The aim of this study is to provide good practice examples of sex/gender sensitive health research. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of research articles published in JECH between 2006 and 2014. An instrument was constructed to evaluate sex/gender sensitivity in four stages of the research process (background, study design, statistical analysis, discussion). RESULTS: In total, 37 articles covering diverse topics were included. Thereof, 22 were evaluated as good practice example in at least one stage; two articles achieved highest ratings across all stages. Good examples of the background referred to available knowledge on sex/gender differences and sex/gender informed theoretical frameworks. Related to the study design, good examples calculated sample sizes to be able to detect sex/gender differences, selected sex/gender sensitive outcome/exposure indicators, or chose different cut-off values for male and female participants. Good examples of statistical analyses used interaction terms with sex/gender or different shapes of the estimated relationship for men and women. Examples of good discussions interpreted their findings related to social and biological explanatory models or questioned the statistical methods used to detect sex/gender differences. CONCLUSIONS: The identified good practice examples may inspire researchers to critically reflect on the relevance of sex/gender issues of their studies and help them to translate methodological recommendations of sex/gender sensitivity into research practice. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5312447
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53124472017-02-24 Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014 Jahn, Ingeborg Börnhorst, Claudia Günther, Frauke Brand, Tilman Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: During the last decades, sex and gender biases have been identified in various areas of biomedical and public health research, leading to compromised validity of research findings. As a response, methodological requirements were developed but these are rarely translated into research practice. The aim of this study is to provide good practice examples of sex/gender sensitive health research. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search of research articles published in JECH between 2006 and 2014. An instrument was constructed to evaluate sex/gender sensitivity in four stages of the research process (background, study design, statistical analysis, discussion). RESULTS: In total, 37 articles covering diverse topics were included. Thereof, 22 were evaluated as good practice example in at least one stage; two articles achieved highest ratings across all stages. Good examples of the background referred to available knowledge on sex/gender differences and sex/gender informed theoretical frameworks. Related to the study design, good examples calculated sample sizes to be able to detect sex/gender differences, selected sex/gender sensitive outcome/exposure indicators, or chose different cut-off values for male and female participants. Good examples of statistical analyses used interaction terms with sex/gender or different shapes of the estimated relationship for men and women. Examples of good discussions interpreted their findings related to social and biological explanatory models or questioned the statistical methods used to detect sex/gender differences. CONCLUSIONS: The identified good practice examples may inspire researchers to critically reflect on the relevance of sex/gender issues of their studies and help them to translate methodological recommendations of sex/gender sensitivity into research practice. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5312447/ /pubmed/28202078 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Jahn, Ingeborg
Börnhorst, Claudia
Günther, Frauke
Brand, Tilman
Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title_full Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title_fullStr Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title_full_unstemmed Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title_short Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006–2014
title_sort examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in jech 2006–2014
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5312447/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28202078
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z
work_keys_str_mv AT jahningeborg examplesofsexgendersensitivityinepidemiologicalresearchresultsofanevaluationoforiginalarticlespublishedinjech20062014
AT bornhorstclaudia examplesofsexgendersensitivityinepidemiologicalresearchresultsofanevaluationoforiginalarticlespublishedinjech20062014
AT guntherfrauke examplesofsexgendersensitivityinepidemiologicalresearchresultsofanevaluationoforiginalarticlespublishedinjech20062014
AT brandtilman examplesofsexgendersensitivityinepidemiologicalresearchresultsofanevaluationoforiginalarticlespublishedinjech20062014