Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2023 Apr 11;13(4):e071200. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-071200.
Historically, neurology research has demonstrated a sex bias with mainly male subjects included in clinical trials as well as lack of reporting of data by sex. In recent years, emphasis has been placed on increased participation of female participants and explicit declaration/evaluation of sex differences in clinical research.We aimed to review the available literature examining sex differences across four subspecialty areas in neurology (demyelination, headache, stroke, epilepsy) and whether sex and gender terms have been used appropriately.
This scoping review was performed by searching Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, Ovid Emcare and APA PsycINFO databases from 2014 to 2020. Four independent pairs of reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Studies whose primary objective was to assess sex or gender differences among adults with one of four neurological conditions were included. We report the scope, content and trends of previous studies that have evaluated sex differences in neurology.
The search retrieved 22 745 articles. Five hundred and eighty-five studies met the inclusion criteria in the review. The majority of studies were observational, often examining similar concepts designed for a different country or regional population, with rare randomised controlled trials designed specifically to assess sex differences in neurology. There was heterogeneity observed in areas of sex-specific focus between the four subspecialty areas. Thirty-six per cent (n=212) of articles used the terms sex and gender interchangeably or incorrectly.
Sex and gender are important biological and social determinants of health. However, the more explicit recognition of these factors in clinical literature has not been adequately translated to significant change in neuroscience research regarding sex differences. This study illustrates the ongoing need for more urgent informed action to recognise and act on sex differences in scientific discovery and correct the use of sex and gender terminology.
The protocol for this scoping review was registered with Open Science Framework.
从历史上看,神经科研究存在性别偏见,主要纳入男性受试者参与临床试验,且缺乏按性别报告数据。近年来,人们越来越重视增加女性参与者的参与度,并明确声明/评估临床研究中的性别差异。我们旨在综述四个神经科亚专科领域(脱髓鞘、头痛、中风、癫痫)的相关文献,评估性别差异,并考察性别和性别术语的使用是否恰当。
本范围界定性综述通过检索 Ovid MEDLINE、Cochrane 对照试验中心注册库、EMBASE、Ovid Emcare 和 APA PsycINFO 数据库,检索时间为 2014 年至 2020 年。四对独立的评审员对标题、摘要和全文进行筛选。纳入的研究主要目的是评估四种神经系统疾病成年患者的性别或性别差异。我们报告了评估神经科性别差异的既往研究的范围、内容和趋势。
检索到 22745 篇文章。585 项研究符合综述纳入标准。大多数研究为观察性研究,经常研究为不同国家或地区人群设计的相似概念,很少有专门设计来评估神经科性别差异的随机对照试验。四个亚专科领域的性别特异性重点领域存在异质性。36%(n=212)的文章混用或错误使用了性别和性别术语。
性别是健康的重要生物学和社会决定因素。然而,临床文献中对这些因素的更明确认识并没有充分转化为神经科学研究中关于性别差异的显著变化。本研究说明了在科学发现中认识和处理性别差异以及纠正性别和性别术语使用方面仍需要更紧迫的行动。
本范围界定性综述的方案在开放科学框架上进行了注册。