Wetherington Cora Lee
National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-9555, USA.
Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007 Oct;15(5):411-7. doi: 10.1037/1064-1297.15.5.411.
In the early years of NIDA-supported drug abuse research, much of the research on women was treatment related and conducted out of concern for their pregnancy status. Since then, drug abuse research on women has expanded to include females of all ages, including infants, children, and adolescents, both human and animal. This expansion has also extended to the study of male-female differences. In the early years of the expansion, National Institutes of Health study sections demanded a heavy burden of proof from drug abuse researchers who proposed to study male-female differences. The need for such research appeared not to have face validity. The tide has now changed with the growing body of literature attesting to its scientific and clinical validity. This change is often reflected in concerns expressed in study sections reviewing drug abuse grant applications that an applicant does not propose to analyze the data for sex-gender differences when in fact the literature suggests that such differences would be observed. Although the change has been slow, it suggests that the burden of proof is shifting from having to defend why sex-gender differences should be studied to having to defend why they should not.
在国家药物滥用研究所(NIDA)资助的药物滥用研究的早期,对女性的大部分研究都与治疗相关,并且是出于对她们怀孕状况的关注而开展的。从那时起,针对女性的药物滥用研究范围已扩大到涵盖所有年龄段的女性,包括婴儿、儿童和青少年,涉及人类和动物研究。这种扩展还延伸到了对男女差异的研究。在扩展的早期,美国国立卫生研究院的研究部门要求那些提议研究男女差异的药物滥用研究人员承担沉重的举证责任。开展此类研究的必要性似乎缺乏表面效度。如今,随着越来越多的文献证明其科学和临床效度,形势已经发生了变化。这种变化常常体现在审查药物滥用资助申请的研究部门所表达的担忧中,即当文献表明可能会观察到性别差异时,申请人却没有提议对数据进行性别差异分析。尽管变化较为缓慢,但这表明举证责任正在从必须为为何要研究性别差异进行辩护,转变为必须为为何不研究性别差异进行辩护。