Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale fort he SAGER guidelines and recommended use

Abstract

Background: Sex and gender differences are often overlooked in research design, study implementation and scientific reporting, as well as in general science communication. This oversight limits the generalizability of research findings and their applicability to clinical practice, in particular for women but also for men. This article describes the rationale for an international set of guidelines to encourage a more systematic approach to the reporting of sex and gender in research across disciplines.
Methods: A panel of 13 experts representing nine countries developed the guidelines through a series of teleconferences, conference presentations and a 2-day workshop. An internet survey of 716 journal editors, scientists and other members of the international publishing community was conducted as well as a literature search on sex and gender policies in scientific publishing.
Results: The Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines are a comprehensive procedure for reporting of sex and gender information in study design, data analyses, results and interpretation of findings.
Conclusions: The SAGER guidelines are designed primarily to guide authors in preparing their manuscripts, but they are also useful for editors, as gatekeepers of science, to integrate assessment of sex and gender into all manuscripts as an integral part of the editorial process.

Keywords

• sex,gender,guideliness,SAGER,scientific research,scientific publishing,gender bias,equity

ARAŞTIRMALARDA CİNSİYET VE TOPLUMSAL CİNSİYET EŞİTLİĞİ: SAGER YÖNERGELERİNİN GEREKÇESİ VE KULLANIM ÖNERİSİ

Öz

Arkaplan: Cinsiyet ve toplumsal cinsiyet farklılıkları genel bilim iletişiminde olduğu gibi araştırma tasarımında, çalışma uygulamasında ve bilimsel raporlamada çoğu kez göz ardı edilir. Bu durum, araştırma bulgularının genelleştirilebilirliği ve bunların klinik uygulamaya uygulanabilirliğini öncellikle kadınlar için, ancak aynı zamanda erkekler için de sınırlamaktadır. Bu makale disiplinlerarası araştırmalarda cinsiyet raporlamaya daha sistematik bir yaklaşımı teşvik etmek için geliştirilen uluslararası yönergelerin gerekçesini açıklamaktadır. Yöntem: Dokuz ülkeyi temsil eden 13 uzmanın katıldığı bir panel, bir dizi telekonferans, konferans sunumları ve 2 günlük bir çalıştay aracılığıyla yönergeler geliştirildi. 716 dergi editörüne, bilim insanlarına ve uluslararası yayıncılık topluluğunun diğer üyelerine internet aracılığıyla anket yapıldı ve aynı zamanda bilimsel yayıncılıkta cinsiyet politikaları üzerine literatür taraması gerçekleştirildi. Bulgular: Araştırmalarda Cinsiyet ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet Eşitliği (Sex and Gender Equity in Research: SAGER) yönergeleri, çalışma tasarımında cinsiyet ve toplumsal cinsiyet bilgilerinin raporlanması, veri analizleri, sonuç ve bulguların yorumlanması için kapsamlı bir prosedürdür. Sonuç: SAGER yönergeleri öncelikle yazarlara çalışmalarını hazırlamada rehberlik etmek üzere tasarlanmıştır. Aynı zamanda, bilimin bekçileri olan editörlerin de cinsiyet ve toplumsal cinsiyet kavramlarının değerlendirmesini editöryal sürecin ayrılmaz bir parçası olarak, tüm çalışmalara dahil etmeleri açısından da yararlı olacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• cinsiyet,toplumsal cinsiyet,yönergeler,SAGER,bilimsel araştırma,bilimsel yayıncılık,toplumsal cinsiyet önyargısı,eşitlik

Kaynakça

1. Coen S, Banister E, editors. What a difference sex and gender make: a gender, sex and health research casebook. Ottowa, Canada: Canadian Institutes of Health Research; 2012.
2. Hoffman DE, Tarzian AJ. The girl who cried pain: a bias against women in the treatment of pain. J Law Med Ethics. 2001;29:13–27.
3. Institute of Medicine (IOM). Sex-specific reporting of scientific research: a workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012.
4. Geller SE, Koch A, Pellettieri B, Carnes M. Inclusion, analysis, and reporting of sex and race/ethnicity in clinical trials: have we made progress? J Womens Health. 2011;20:315–20.
5. Leopold SS, Beadling L, Dobbs MB, et al. Fairness to all: gender and sex in scientific reporting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472:391–2.
6. Clayton JA, Collins FS. Policy: NIH to balance sex in cell and animal studies. Nature. 2014;15(509):282–3.
7. Kim ESH, Menon V. Status of women in cardiovascular clinical trials. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009;29:279–83.
8. Johnson JL, Greaves L, Repta R. Better science with sex and gender: facilitating the use of a sex and gender-based analysis in health research. Int J Equity Health. 2009;8:14.

9. Greenspan JD, Craft RM, LeResche L, et al. Studying sex and gender differences in pain and analgesia: a consensus report. Pain. 2007;132:S26–45.
10. U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-01-286R. Drug safety: Most drugs withdrawn in recent years had greater health risks for women, 2001.[Internet]. Available at: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-01-286R.
11. Food and Drug Administration. Risk of next-morning impairment after use of insomnia drugs; FDA requires lower recommended doses for certain drugs containing zolpidem (Ambien, Ambien CR, Edluar, and Zolpimist), FDA Drug Safety Communication, 2013. [Internet]. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm334033.htm.
12. Linder A, Schick S, Hell W, et al. ADSEAT–Adaptive seat to reduce neck injuries for female and male occupants. Accid Anal Prev. 2013;60:334–43.
13. Jakobsson L, Norin H, Svensson MY. Parameters influencing AIS 1 neck injury outcome in frontal impacts. Traffic Inj Prev. 2004;5:156–63.
14. Zarin DA, Tse T, Ide NC. Trial registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between May and October 2005. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2779–87.
15. Panic N, Leoncini E, de Belvis G, Ricciardi W, Boccia S. Evaluation of the endorsement of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement on the quality of published systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS One. 2013;8:e83138.
16. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, for the CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Ann Int Med. 2010;152:726–32.
17. Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, et al. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust. 2006;185:263–67.
18. Kilkenny C, Browne WJ, Cuthill IC, Emerson M, Altman DG. Improving bioscience research reporting: the ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal research. PLoS Biol. 2010;8:e1000412.
19. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals, updated December 2014. [Internet]. Available at: www.icmje.org/icmje-recommendations.pdf.
20. No authors listed. Taking sex into account in medicine. Lancet. 2011; 378: 1826.
21. Doull M, Runnels VE, Tudiver S, Boscoe M. Appraising the evidence: applying sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) to Cochrane systematic reviews on cardiovascular diseases. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19:997–1003.
22. Doull M, Welch V, Puil L, et al. Development and evaluation of ‘Briefing Notes’ as a novel knowledge translation tool to aid the implementation of sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a pilot study. PLoS One. 2014;9:e110786.
23. Nowatzki N, Grant KR. Sex is not enough: the need for gender-based analysis in health research. Health Care Women Int. 2011;32:263–77.
24. Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Gender, sex and health research guide: a tool for CIHR applicants, 2014. [Internet]. Available at: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/32019.html.
25. NIH policy and guidelines on the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in clinical research—amended, 2001. [Internet]. Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/women_min.htm.
26. Nieuwenhoven L, Klinge I. Scientific excellence in applying sex- and gendersensitive methods in biomedical and health research. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010;19:313–21.
27. Nature’s sexism. Nature [Internet]. 2012;491(7425):495–495. Available from: http://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/491495a.
28. Gendered Innovations in Science, Health & Medicine, Engineering, and Environment. Sex and gender analysis checklists, 2014. [Internet].Available at: http://genderedinnovations.stanford.edu/researchers.html.