Determining If Sex Bias Exists in Human Surgical Clinical Research
View abstract on PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.Sex bias is prevalent in surgical research, with few studies achieving equal inclusion or analysis of male and female participants. Addressing this disparity is crucial for equitable evidence-based medicine and patient care.
Area Of Science
- Medical research
- Surgical clinical research
- Bibliometrics
Background
- Sex is an undercontrolled variable in clinical research.
- Potential sex bias in human surgical clinical research requires investigation.
Purpose Of The Study
- To determine if sex bias exists in human surgical clinical research.
- To assess if data are reported and analyzed using sex as an independent variable.
- To identify surgical specialties with the greatest and least sex biases.
Main Methods
- Bibliometric analysis of 1303 peer-reviewed surgical articles published between 2011-2012.
- Data abstracted included study type, participant sex, sex matching, and sex-based reporting, analysis, and discussion.
- Analysis focused on inclusion, matching, and reporting of male and female participants.
Main Results
- Only 17% of studies included both sexes, with significant variability in participant numbers.
- Female participants constituted over 50% of the total, yet inclusion was often unequal.
- 38.1% reported data by sex, 33.2% analyzed by sex, and 22.9% discussed sex-based results.
- Sex matching was poor (45.2% matched by 50%). Colorectal surgery showed the best matching; cardiac surgery showed the worst.
Conclusions
- Sex bias is evident in human surgical clinical research.
- Unequal inclusion, poor sex matching, and limited sex-based analysis highlight a significant disparity.
- Addressing this bias is imperative for developing evidence-based medicine that benefits both sexes.