Putman Andrew, Cole Adam, Dogra Shilpa
Faculty of Health Sciences, Ontario Tech University, Oshawa, Ontario, Canada.
PLoS One. 2025 May 16;20(5):e0323834. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0323834. eCollection 2025.
A growing body of research indicates that sex (biological) and gender (sociocultural) influence health through a variety of distinct mechanisms. Sex- and Gender-Based Analysis (SGBA) techniques could examine these influences, however, there is a lack of nuanced and easily implementable measurement tools for health research. To address this gap, we created the Sex- and Gender-Based Analysis Tool - 5 item (SGBA-5).
This research aims to assess the validity and reliability of the SGBA-5 for use in health sciences research where sex or gender are not primary variables of interest.
A Delphi consensus study was conducted with Canadian researchers (n = 14). The Delphi experts rated the validity of each SGBA-5 item on a 5-point Likert scale each round, receiving summary statistics of other experts' responses after the first round. A conservative threshold for consensus agreement (75% rating an item 4+ of 5) was used given the novelty of this scale's items. Reliability was assessed through a two-armed test-retest study. The university student arm (n = 89) was conducted in-person (on paper), and the older adult arm (n = 71) was conducted online (digitally).
The Delphi study ended after three rounds; experts reached consensus agreement on the validity of the biological sex item of the SGBA-5 (93%) and consensus non-agreement on each of the gendered aspect of health items (identity: 64%, expression: 64%, roles: 50%, relations: 57%). Both the student arm (sex item: [Formula: see text], gendered items: [Formula: see text]) and the older adult arm (sex item: [Formula: see text], gendered items: [Formula: see text]) of the test-retest study indicated that all items were reliable.
The novel SGBA-5 tool demonstrated reliability across all scale items and validity of the biological sex item. The gendered aspects of health items may be valid. Future research can further develop the SGBA-5 as a tool for use in health research.
越来越多的研究表明，生理性别和社会性别通过多种不同机制影响健康。基于性别的分析（SGBA）技术可以检验这些影响，然而，在健康研究中缺乏细致入微且易于实施的测量工具。为了填补这一空白，我们创建了基于性别的分析工具-5项版（SGBA-5）。
本研究旨在评估SGBA-5在性或性别并非主要研究变量的健康科学研究中的有效性和可靠性。
对加拿大研究人员（n = 14）进行了德尔菲共识研究。德尔菲专家在每一轮中根据5点李克特量表对每个SGBA-5项目的有效性进行评分，并在第一轮后收到其他专家回复的汇总统计数据。鉴于该量表项目的新颖性，采用了保守的共识一致阈值（75%的人将一个项目评为5分制中的4分及以上）。通过双臂重测研究评估可靠性。大学生组（n = 89）采用纸质方式进行面对面测试，老年人组（n = 71）采用数字方式进行在线测试。
德尔菲研究在三轮后结束；专家们就SGBA-5的生理性别项目的有效性达成了共识（93%），但对健康项目的每个性别方面均未达成共识（身份认同：64%，表达：64%，角色：50%，关系：57%）。重测研究的大学生组（性别项目：[公式：见原文]，性别相关项目：[公式：见原文]）和老年人组（性别项目：[公式：见原文]，性别相关项目：[公式：见原文]）均表明所有项目都是可靠的。
新颖的SGBA-5工具在所有量表项目上都表现出可靠性，生理性别项目具有有效性。健康项目的性别方面可能是有效的。未来的研究可以进一步开发SGBA-5，使其成为健康研究中的一种工具。
