Karimi Parmida, Abolghasemi Fard Asal, Parnia Aran, Kamvar Radin, Zojaji Seyedehhasti, Behroozi Narges, Karimi Amir
Department of Dentistry, Herman Ostrow School of Dentistry, Los Angeles, USA.
Department of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Modern Science and Technologies, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, IRN.
Cureus. 2024 Dec 4;16(12):e75098. doi: 10.7759/cureus.75098. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Despite progress in the representation of women in the medical profession, substantial gender disparities persist in leadership roles, particularly in clinical trials. Clinical trials are crucial to evidence-based medicine, offering visibility, career advancement, and future funding opportunities for principal investigators (PIs). However, women remain underrepresented in these roles, especially in genetics. This study aimed to evaluate (1) the proportion of women PIs in genetic clinical trials and its change over time, (2) trial characteristics (phase, funding source, intervention type) associated with women PIs, and (3) the geographic distribution of women-led trials in the United States.
We analyzed 4,112 genetic clinical trials conducted in the United States and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov between 2007 and 2024. Trials lacking defined phases or complete investigator information were excluded. Statistical analyses were conducted using Fisher's exact tests and univariate linear regression.
Women comprised 1,552 out of 4,112 (37.7%) PIs, with representation fluctuating from seven out of 24 (29.2%) in 2008 to a peak of 17 out of 29 (58%) in 2010 before leveling off to 573 out of 1,712 (33%) in 2024. Women PIs conducted a higher number of behavioral (240 out of 1,552, 15.5%) and other interventions (218 out of 1,552, 14%) studies, compared to 196 out of 2,560 (7.7%) and 222 out of 2,560 (8.7%), respectively, for men. On the other hand, men PIs had a higher number of genetic (111 out of 2,560, 4.3%) and drug (1,654 out of 2,560, 64.6%) trials, compared to 44 out of 1,552 (7.7%) and 841 out of 1,552 (54.2%), respectively, for women. Women received more federal funding (24 out of 1,552 (1.5%) vs. 17 out of 2,560 (0.6%)), while men dominated industry funding (695 out of 2,560 (27.1%) vs. 386 out of 1,552 (24.9%)).
Women remain underrepresented as PIs in genetic clinical trials, with no sustained growth over time. Mentorship programs, equitable funding policies, and increased visibility of women researchers are essential to address these disparities and foster equity in clinical trial leadership.
尽管医学领域女性从业者的比例有所上升,但在领导岗位上,尤其是在临床试验方面,性别差距仍然显著。临床试验对于循证医学至关重要,为主要研究者(PI)提供了知名度、职业晋升机会以及未来的资金支持。然而,女性在这些角色中的代表性仍然不足,尤其是在遗传学领域。本研究旨在评估:(1)基因临床试验中女性PI的比例及其随时间的变化;(2)与女性PI相关的试验特征(阶段、资金来源、干预类型);(3)美国女性主导试验的地理分布。
我们分析了2007年至2024年间在美国进行并在ClinicalTrials.gov上注册的4112项基因临床试验。缺乏明确阶段或完整研究者信息的试验被排除。使用Fisher精确检验和单变量线性回归进行统计分析。
在4112名PI中,女性有1552名(占37.7%),其占比从2008年的24名中的7名(29.2%)波动至2010年的29名中的17名(58%),随后在2024年稳定在1712名中的573名(33%)。女性PI进行的行为学研究(1552名中的240名,占15.5%)和其他干预研究(1552名中的218名,占14%)数量较多,相比之下,男性在2560名中分别有196名(占7.7%)和222名(占8.7%)。另一方面,男性PI进行的基因试验(2560名中的111名,占4.3%)和药物试验(2560名中的1654名,占64.6%)数量较多,相比之下,女性在1552名中分别有44名(占2.8%)和841名(占54.2%)。女性获得的联邦资金更多(1552名中的24名(占1.5%) vs. 2560名中的17名(占0.6%)),而男性在行业资金方面占主导(2560名中的695名(占27.1%) vs. 1552名中的386名(占24.9%))。
在基因临床试验中,女性作为PI的代表性仍然不足,且随着时间推移没有持续增长。指导计划、公平的资金政策以及提高女性研究人员的知名度对于解决这些差距和促进临床试验领导权的公平性至关重要。