Cargando…

Gender bias and menstrual blood in stem cell research: A review of pubmed articles (2008–2020)

Despite proven scientific quality of menstrual blood mesenchymal cells, research and science output using those cells is still incipient, which suggests there is a resistance to the study of this type of cell by scientists, and a lack of attention to its potential for cell therapy, regenerative medi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Manica, Daniela Tonelli, Asensi, Karina Dutra, Mazzarelli, Gaia, Tura, Bernardo, Barata, Germana, Goldenberg, Regina Coeli Santos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9754585/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36531244
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2022.957164
Descripción
Sumario:Despite proven scientific quality of menstrual blood mesenchymal cells, research and science output using those cells is still incipient, which suggests there is a resistance to the study of this type of cell by scientists, and a lack of attention to its potential for cell therapy, regenerative medicine and bioengineering. This study analyzes the literature about the menstrual blood mesenchymal stromal/stem cells (mbMSC) on the PubMed database between 2008–2020 and the social attention it received on Twitter. A comparative analysis showed that mbMSC accounts for a very small portion of mesenchymal cell research (0.25%). Most first authors are women (53.2%), whereas most last authors are men (63.74%), reinforcing an already known, and still significant, gender gap between last and corresponding authors. Menstrual blood tends to be less used in experiments and its scientific value tends to be underestimated, which brings gender bias to a technical and molecular level. Although women are more positive in the mbMSC debate on Twitter, communication efforts toward visibility and public interest in menstrual cells has room to grow.