Dept. of Biological Sciences, NC State University, Raleigh, NC, United States.
Dept. of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, United States.
Front Neuroendocrinol. 2020 Apr;57:100835. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100835. Epub 2020 Feb 15.
Neuroscience research has historically demonstrated sex bias that favors male over female research subjects, as well as sex omission, which is the lack of reporting sex. Here we analyzed the status of sex bias and omission in neuroscience research published across six different journals in 2017. Regarding sex omission, 16% of articles did not report sex. Regarding sex bias, 52% of neuroscience articles reported using both males and females, albeit only 15% of articles using both males and females reported assessing sex as an experimental variable. Overrepresentation of the sole use of males compared to females persisted (26% versus 5%, respectively). Sex bias and omission differed across research models, but not by reported NIH funding status. Sex omission differed across journals. These findings represent the latest information regarding the complex status of sex in neuroscience research and illustrate the continued need for thoughtful and informed action to enhance scientific discovery.
神经科学研究历史上存在偏爱雄性研究对象而忽视雌性研究对象的性别偏见,以及缺乏对性别的报告,即性别遗漏。在这里,我们分析了 2017 年发表在六个不同期刊上的神经科学研究中性别偏见和遗漏的现状。关于性别遗漏,16%的文章没有报告性别。关于性别偏见,52%的神经科学文章报告同时使用了雄性和雌性,但只有 15%的同时使用了雄性和雌性的文章报告了将性别作为实验变量进行评估。与女性相比,仅使用雄性的比例过高(分别为 26%和 5%)。性别偏见和遗漏在研究模型中存在差异,但与 NIH 资助状况无关。性别遗漏在不同的期刊中存在差异。这些发现代表了神经科学研究中性别问题的最新信息,说明了需要持续采取深思熟虑和知情的行动,以增强科学发现。