Centre for Health Services and Policy Research, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 201-2206 East Mall, Vancouver, BC, V6T1Z3, Canada.
Int J Equity Health. 2010 Nov 19;9:26. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-9-26.
Sex and gender sensitive inquiry is critical in pharmaceutical policy due to the sector's historical connection with women's health issues and due to the confluence of biological, social, political, and economic factors that shape the development, promotion, use, and effects of medicinal treatments. A growing number of research bodies internationally have issued laws, guidance or encouragement to support conducting sex and gender based analysis (SGBA) in all health related research.
In order to investigate the degree to which attempts to mainstream SGBA have translated into actual research practices in the field of pharmaceutical policy, we employed methods of literature scoping and mapping. A random sample of English-language pharmaceutical policy research articles published in 2008 and indexed in MEDLINE was analysed according to: 1) use of sex and gender related language, 2) application of sex and gender related concepts, and 3) level of SGBA employed.
Two thirds of the articles (67%) in our sample made no mention of sex or gender. Similarly, 69% did not contain any sex or gender related content whatsoever. Of those that did contain some sex or gender content, the majority focused on sex. Only 2 of the 85 pharmaceutical policy articles reviewed for this study were primarily focused on sex or gender issues; both of these were review articles. Eighty-one percent of the articles in our study contained no SGBA, functioning instead at a sex-blind or gender-neutral level, even though the majority of these (86%) were focused on topics with sex or gender aspects.
Despite pharmaceutical policy's long entwinement with issues of sex and gender, and the emergence of international guidelines for the inclusion of SGBA in health research, the community of pharmaceutical policy researchers has not internalized, or "mainstreamed," the practice. Increased application of SGBA is, in most cases, not only appropriate for the topics under investigation, but well within the reach of today's pharmaceutical policy researchers.
由于制药行业与女性健康问题的历史渊源，以及塑造药物治疗开发、推广、使用和效果的生物、社会、政治和经济因素的融合，性别敏感调查在药物政策中至关重要。越来越多的国际研究机构发布了法律、指导意见或鼓励措施，以支持在所有与健康相关的研究中进行基于性别的分析。
为了调查将性别敏感分析纳入药物政策领域的主流研究实践的程度，我们采用了文献范围和映射的方法。根据以下标准，对 2008 年以英语发表并在 MEDLINE 中索引的随机样本药物政策研究文章进行了分析：1）使用与性和性别相关的语言，2）应用与性和性别相关的概念，以及 3）采用的性别敏感分析水平。
我们样本中的三分之二的文章（67%）没有提到性或性别。同样，69%的文章没有包含任何与性或性别相关的内容。在包含一些性或性别内容的文章中，大多数文章的重点是性别。在我们研究中审查的 85 篇药物政策文章中，只有 2 篇主要关注性或性别问题；这两篇都是评论文章。我们研究中的 81%的文章没有进行性别敏感分析，而是在性别盲或性别中立的水平上运作，尽管其中大多数（86%）的文章侧重于具有性别方面的主题。
尽管药物政策长期以来一直与性别问题交织在一起，并且国际上也出台了将性别敏感分析纳入健康研究的指南，但药物政策研究人员群体尚未内化或“主流化”这一实践。在大多数情况下，增加性别敏感分析的应用不仅适合所调查的主题，而且也在当今药物政策研究人员的能力范围内。
