• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[研究人员为何将女性排除在试验人群之外]

[Why researchers excluded women from their trial populations].

作者信息

Söderström M

机构信息

Avdelningen för allmänmedicin, Göteborgs universitet.

出版信息

Lakartidningen. 2001 Mar 28;98(13):1524-8.

PMID:11330148
Abstract

Women are still, but to a lesser extent than twenty years ago, excluded as subjects of medical research on diseases that are prevalent among both men and women. To discover the basis on which women were excluded, the research ethics committee requested a written explanation. In all, 26 such project applications were identified during 1997-1999 (2% of the total number of applications during the period). Most researchers had more than one reason for exclusion. Qualitative analysis revealed that these explanations could be grouped into three categories, depending on whether women were excluded for scientific, historical or economic reasons. The scientific reasons correspond mainly to a lack of pertinent knowledge of the physiology and metabolism of women of childbearing age. Consequently, results lacked external validity. Perhaps the lack of knowledge of women's physiology and metabolism could be explained by a lack of female experimental animals in pre-clinical studies. One notes however a general concern not to harm women of childbearing age. The historical reasons underlie the tendency to repeat studies on former study populations that happened to be composed of men. Finally, tight research budgets restricted the participation of women but not of men. The Swedish Medical Research Council issued a policy document in 1998 to the effect that research ethics committees could require additional information concerning choice of study population. This study demonstrates an avoidable occurrence of gender bias in medical research.

摘要

在针对男性和女性都普遍罹患的疾病开展医学研究时,女性仍然被排除在研究对象之外,不过与二十年前相比,这种情况有所减少。为了找出女性被排除在外的依据,研究伦理委员会要求提供书面解释。在1997年至1999年期间,总共确定了26份此类项目申请(占该时期申请总数的2%)。大多数研究人员给出的排除女性的理由不止一个。定性分析表明,这些解释可分为三类,具体取决于女性被排除是出于科学、历史还是经济原因。科学原因主要是缺乏对育龄女性生理和新陈代谢的相关了解。因此,研究结果缺乏外部有效性。或许临床前研究中缺乏雌性实验动物可以解释对女性生理和新陈代谢了解不足的原因。然而,人们普遍担心会伤害育龄女性。历史原因在于倾向于对以前恰好由男性组成的研究人群重复进行研究。最后,紧张的研究预算限制了女性而非男性的参与。瑞典医学研究理事会在1998年发布了一份政策文件,大意是研究伦理委员会可以要求提供有关研究人群选择的更多信息。这项研究表明,医学研究中存在可避免的性别偏见现象。

相似文献

1
[Why researchers excluded women from their trial populations].[研究人员为何将女性排除在试验人群之外]
Lakartidningen. 2001 Mar 28;98(13):1524-8.
2
There is no women's health crisis.不存在女性健康危机。
Public Interest. 1998 Winter;130:21-33.
3
ACOG Committee Opinion. Ethical considerations in research involving women.美国妇产科医师学会委员会意见。涉及女性的研究中的伦理考量。
Obstet Gynecol. 2003 Nov;102(5 Pt 1):1107-13.
4
The invisible woman: gender bias in medical research.隐形女性:医学研究中的性别偏见
Womens Rights Law Report. 1994;15:123-42.
5
[Management of cardiovascular diseases is characterized by male perspective. Women are subjected to incorrect management, diagnosis and treatment].心血管疾病的管理以男性视角为特征。女性遭受不正确的管理、诊断和治疗。
Lakartidningen. 2001 Jul 25;98(30-31):3314-8.
6
Gender differences in special needs populations.特殊需求人群中的性别差异。
Dent Clin North Am. 2001 Jul;45(3):541-53.
7
Is there gender bias in nursing research?护理研究中存在性别偏见吗?
Res Nurs Health. 2008 Oct;31(5):417-27. doi: 10.1002/nur.20276.
8
Participation of women in clinical trials of drug therapies: a context for the controversies.女性参与药物治疗临床试验:争议背景
Medscape Womens Health. 2001 Oct;6(5):1.
9
[Gender and DSM: a historical review, controversies and perspectives].[性别与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》:历史回顾、争议与展望]
Vertex. 2008 Sep-Oct;19(81):309-16.
10
Women of childbearing potential in clinical research: perspectives on NIH policy and liability issues.临床研究中有生育潜力的女性:对美国国立卫生研究院政策及责任问题的看法。
Food Drug Cosmet Med Device Law Dig. 1996 Jan;13(1):7-11.

引用本文的文献

1
Do pregnant people have opportunities to participate in clinical trials? an exploratory survey of NIHR HTA-funded trialists.孕妇有机会参与临床试验吗?对英国国家卫生研究院健康技术评估资助的试验人员的一项探索性调查。
Trials. 2025 Jul 4;26(1):239. doi: 10.1186/s13063-025-08949-w.
2
Representation of Women in Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review.心房颤动消融随机对照试验中女性的代表性:系统评价
J Am Heart Assoc. 2025 Jan 21;14(2):e035181. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.124.035181. Epub 2025 Jan 10.
3
Sex and gender in perioperative cardiovascular research: protocol for a scoping review.
围手术期心血管研究中的性别与性:一项范围综述方案
Syst Rev. 2025 Jan 8;14(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s13643-024-02716-9.
4
The influence of sex-specific factors on biological transformations and health outcomes in aging processes.性别特异性因素对衰老过程中生物转化和健康结果的影响。
Biogerontology. 2024 Oct;25(5):775-791. doi: 10.1007/s10522-024-10121-x. Epub 2024 Jul 13.
5
Sex differences in cardiovascular outcomes of SGLT-2 inhibitors in heart failure randomized controlled trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis.心力衰竭随机对照试验中SGLT-2抑制剂心血管结局的性别差异:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Am Heart J Plus. 2023 Feb;26. doi: 10.1016/j.ahjo.2023.100261. Epub 2023 Jan 30.
6
Functional neurological disorder is a feminist issue.功能性神经疾病是一个女权主义问题。
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2023 Oct;94(10):855-862. doi: 10.1136/jnnp-2022-330192. Epub 2023 Mar 28.
7
From Learning to Relearning: A Framework for Diminishing Bias in Social Robot Navigation.从学习到再学习:减少社交机器人导航偏差的框架。
Front Robot AI. 2021 Mar 24;8:650325. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2021.650325. eCollection 2021.
8
Gender-Specific Response in Pain and Function to Biologic Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Gender-Bias-Mitigated, Observational, Intention-to-Treat Study at Two Years.膝关节骨关节炎生物治疗中疼痛和功能的性别特异性反应:一项为期两年的减轻性别偏见的观察性意向性治疗研究。
Stem Cells Int. 2021 Feb 25;2021:6648437. doi: 10.1155/2021/6648437. eCollection 2021.
9
A 15-Year Review of Trends in Representation of Female Subjects in Islamic Bioethics Research.对伊斯兰生物伦理学研究中女性受试者代表性趋势的15年回顾。
J Relig Health. 2017 Feb;56(1):284-293. doi: 10.1007/s10943-016-0283-y.
10
Gender bias in research: how does it affect evidence based medicine?研究中的性别偏见:它如何影响循证医学?
J R Soc Med. 2007 Jan;100(1):2-3. doi: 10.1177/014107680710000102.