Bias against research on gender bias

Sex and gender in infection and immunity: addressing the bottlenecks from basic science to public health and clinical applications

Although sex and gender are recognized as major determinants of health and immunity, their role is rarely considered in clinical practice and public health. We identified six bottlenecks preventing the inclusion of sex and gender considerations from basic science to clinical practice, precision medicine and public health policies. (i) A terminology-related bottleneck, linked to the definitions of sex and gender themselves, and the lack of consensus on how to evaluate gender. (ii) A data-related bottleneck, due to gaps in sex-disaggregated data, data on trans/non-binary people and gender identity. (iii) A translational bottleneck, limited by animal models and the underrepresentation of gender minorities in biomedical studies. (iv) A statistical bottleneck, with inappropriate statistical analyses and results interpretation. (v) An ethical bottleneck posed by the underrepresentation of pregnant people and gender minorities in clinical studies. (vi) A structural bottleneck, as systemic bias and discriminations affect not only academic research but also decision makers. We specify guidelines for researchers, scientific journals, funding agencies and academic institutions to address these bottlenecks. Following such guidelines will support the development of more efficient and equitable care strategies for all.

Reframing data ethics in research methods education: a pathway to critical data literacy

This paper presents an ethical framework designed to support the development of critical data literacy for research methods courses and data training programmes in higher education. The framework we present draws upon our reviews of literature, course syllabi and existing frameworks on data ethics. For this research we reviewed 250 research methods syllabi from across the disciplines, as well as 80 syllabi from data science programmes to understand how or if data ethics was taught. We also reviewed 12 data ethics frameworks drawn from different sectors. Finally, we reviewed an extensive and diverse body of literature about data practices, research ethics, data ethics and critical data literacy, in order to develop a transversal model that can be adopted across higher education. To promote and support ethical approaches to the collection and use of data, ethics training must go beyond securing informed consent to enable a critical understanding of the techno-centric environment and the intersecting hierarchies of power embedded in technology and data. By fostering ethics as a method, educators can enable research that protects vulnerable groups and empower communities.

Gender and Sex in Medical Practice: An Exploratory Study on Knowledge, Behavior, and Attitude among Sicilian Physicians

Personalized medicine is a new paradigm in health care, and the concept of socio-cultural gender, as opposed to biological sex, emerged in several medical approaches. This exploratory study aimed to investigate the knowledge of sex and gender in clinical medicine among Sicilian physicians. Data collection was based on an online survey sent to the members of the Medical Councils of Sicily (Italy). The questionnaire included nine specific items about awareness and attitudes regarding gender medicine and its importance in clinical practice. 8023 Sicilian physicians received the solicitation e-mail and only 496 responded. Regarding the knowledge of gender medicine, 71.1% of participants stated that they know it, while 88.5% believe that gender medicine should be included in training programs. Similarly, a high percentage (77.6%) would like to keep up to date on this topic. Physicians sampled seem to understand the importance of gender medicine principles, although their experience of some gender issues (i.e., sex disparities in acute cardiovascular care and smoking cessation strategies) is low (55.44% and 21.57%, respectively). The results of this exploratory study should encourage facing the gender medicine gap in the current curricula of health professionals and should implement the transitional value of sex and gender principles in the clinical setting.

"Broad" Impact: Perceptions of Sex/Gender-Related Psychology Journals

Because men are overrepresented within positions of power, men are perceived as the default in academia (androcentrism). Androcentric bias emerges whereby research by men and/or dominated by men is perceived as higher quality and gains more attention. We examined if these androcentric biases materialize within fields that study bias (psychology). How do individuals in close contact with psychology view psychology research outlets (i.e., journals) with titles including the words women, gender, sex, or feminism (sex/gender-related) or contain the words men or masculinity (men-related; Study 1) versus psychology journals that publish other-specialized research, and do these perceptions differ in the general public? While the men-related journal was less meritorious than its other-specialty journal, evidence emerged supporting androcentric bias such that the men-related journal was more favorable than the other sex/gender-related journals (Study 1). Further, undergraduate men taking psychology classes rated sex/gender-related versus other-specialty journals as less favorable, were less likely to recommend subscription (Studies 1–2), and rated the journals as lower quality (Study 2 only). Low endorsement of feminist ideology was associated with less support for sex/gender-related journals versus matched other-specialty journals (Studies 1–2). Decreased subscription recommendations for sex/gender-related journals (and the men-related journal) were mediated by decreased favorability and quality beliefs, especially for men (for the sex/gender-related journals) and those low in feminist ideology (Studies 1–2). However, we found possible androcentric-interest within the public sphere. The public reach of articles (as determined by Altmetrics) published in sex/gender-related was greater than other-specialty journals (Study 3). The consequences of these differential perceptions for students versus the public and the impact on women’s advancement in social science and psychological science are discussed.

Exploring parity in female authorship of pharmacoepidemiology articles: A case study of the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies and its citing articles

PURPOSE

The Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES) studies the benefits and risks of post-market drugs and evaluates its research mobilization efforts for accountability, demonstrating value, and learning. As part of these evaluation efforts, and acknowledging gender disparity in authorship across many academic disciplines, CNODES examined the relationship between gender and authorship in its own journal articles and the literature citing them.

METHODS

CNODES articles (published 2012-2017) and all citing articles were identified and extracted using Scopus. Scopus author IDs were used to extract full names and a web service (www.genderapi.com) was used to estimate gender, converting all probabilities <80% to "indeterminate." T-tests and visualizations were used to compare the proportion of females between CNODES and the citing literature.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight CNODES articles and 463 citing articles were identified. The mean number of authors per article was 9.5 in CNODES articles and 5.7 in the citing literature. CNODES articles had a female authorship rate of 36%, compared to 29% in the citing literature (7% difference, 95% CI: [1%, 13%]). There were no female authors in 14% of CNODES articles versus 36% of the citing literature. Women were first authors in 25% and corresponding authors in 14% of CNODES articles.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis provides a benchmark and method to monitor progress in female parity in pharmacoepidemiology authorship. Further work is needed to determine and address barriers and facilitators to women's recruitment and advancement in the field of pharmacoepidemiology.

The Person's Care Requires a Sex and Gender Approach

There is an urgent need to optimize pharmacology therapy with a consideration of high interindividual variability and economic costs. A sex-gender approach (which considers men, women, and people of diverse gender identities) and the assessment of differences in sex and gender promote global health, avoiding systematic errors that generate results with low validity. Care for people should consider the single individual and his or her past and present life experiences, as well as his or her relationship with care providers. Therefore, intersectoral and interdisciplinary studies are urgently required. It is desirable to create teams made up of men and women to meet the needs of both. Finally, it is also necessary to build an alliance among regulatory and ethic authorities, statistics, informatics, the healthcare system and providers, researchers, the pharmaceutical and diagnostic industries, decision makers, and patients to overcome the gender gap in medicine and to take real care of a person in an appropriate manner.

The role of gender in peer-group perceptions of climate scientists' media statements

This research explores whether environmental scientists perceive their male and female peers differently when making statements in the media including policy advocacy. Environmental scientists in the United Kingdom were provided with a media statement by a fictitious scientist containing a mixture of scientific information and advocacy, and asked to rate the statement against various attributes. Attributes were designed to represent stereotypes associated with male and female tendencies, and with science (impartial objectivity) and the media (dramatic narrative). The statements were randomly assigned to one of two male and two female scientists. Where the statements were attributed to a female scientist, male environmental scientists rated the fictitious scientist as significantly more 'dramatic' and 'biased' than their female counterparts did. These gendered attributes are typically held as contrary to the norms of science, suggesting an implicit bias among male scientists when reviewing their female peers' media statements.

Research Conducted in Women Was Deemed More Impactful but Less Publishable than the Same Research Conducted in Men

Background: Female scientists, who are more likely than their male counterparts to study women and report findings by sex/gender, fare worse in the article peer review process. It is unknown whether the gender of research participants influences the recommendation to publish an article describing the study. Materials and Methods: Reviewers were randomly assigned to evaluate one of three versions of an article abstract describing a clinical study conducted in men, women, or individuals. Reviewers assessed the study's scientific rigor, its level of contribution to medical science, and whether they would recommend publishing the full article. Responses were analyzed with logistic regression controlling for reviewer background variables, including sex and experience level. Results: There was no significant difference in perceived research rigor by abstract condition; contribution to medical science was perceived to be greater for research conducted in women than men (odds ratio = 1.7; p = 0.030). Nevertheless, reviewers were almost twice as likely to recommend publication for research conducted in men than the same research conducted in women (predicted probability 0.606 vs. 0.322; p = 0.000). Conclusions: These results are consistent with abundant data from multiple sources showing a lower societal value placed on women than men. Because female investigators are more likely than male investigators to study women, our findings suggest a previously unrecognized bias that could contribute to gender asymmetries in the publication outcomes of peer review. This pro-male publication bias could be an additional barrier to leadership attainment for women in academic medicine and the advancement of women's health.

Gender influence on work satisfaction and leadership for medical oncologists: a survey of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM)

Background

Women represent an increasing proportion of the oncology workforce; however, globally this does not translate into leadership roles, reflecting disparities in career opportunities between men and women. The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) undertook a survey to investigate gender disparity in the Spanish oncology context.

Design

An online survey was made available to SEOM medical oncologists between February and May 2019. It included demographics, professional context and achievements, parenthood and family conciliation issues, workplace gender bias, and approaches to address disparities.

Results

Of the 316 eligible respondents, 71.5% were women, 59.5% were aged 45 or younger, and 66.1% had children. Among women, 12.4% were division or unit heads, compared with 45.5% of men, with most women (74.3%) being attending medical oncologists, compared with 45.5% of men. More males were professors (34.4% versus 14.2% of females), had a PhD (46.7% versus 28.8%), and/or had led clinical research groups (41.1% versus 9.7%). Spending time overseas after completing a residency was also more common for men than women (34.4% versus 20.4%). Professional satisfaction was similar between genders, driven primarily by patient care and intellectual stimulation. More women (40.7%) considered parenthood to have a strong negative impact on their career, compared with men (9.0%). Main perceived barriers to gender equality included a lack of work–life balance (72.6% women, 44.4% men), bias of peers and superiors (50.0% women, 18.9% men), and different career goals (41.2% women, 24.4% men). Preferred solutions included educational programs and scholarships (52.9%), communication and leadership training (35.8%), childcare at conferences (33.2%), and postmaternity return-to-work incentives (32.0%).

Conclusion

There is a clear paucity of equal opportunities for female oncologists in Spain. This can be addressed by encouraging professional development and merit recognition particularly for younger female oncologists, and empowering women to be involved in management and leadership of institutions and professional societies.

•

Under-representation of women in leadership roles in oncology is a widely acknowledged issue receiving global attention.

•

This study is a national description of leadership and educational opportunities in terms of gender and family circumstances.

•

Perceptions of gender bias in the workplace gender inequality or family conciliation issues and are described.

•

Initiatives for equal opportunities in oncology are needed supporting female academic career development and recognition.

Closing the gender gap at academic conferences: A tool for monitoring and assessing academic events

The importance of participation in academic conferences is well known for members of the scientific community. It is not only for the feedback and the improvement of the work, it is also about career development, building networks and increasing visibility. Nevertheless, women continue to be under-represented in these academic events and even more so in the most visible positions such as speaking roles. This paper presents the development of a tool based on performance indicators, which will allow monitoring and evaluating gender roles and inequalities in academic conferences in order to tackle the underrepresentation of women. The study identifies relevant perspectives (participation, organizational structure and attitudes) and designs specific lists of performance indicators for each of them. The tool is based on a combination of two multicriteria techniques, Analytic Hierarchy Process and Analytic Hierarchy Process Sort, and a qualitative analysis based on in-depth interviews and information gathered from a focus group. The use of the AHP multi-criteria decision technique has allowed us to weight the indicators according to the opinion of several experts, and with them to be able to generate from these weightings composite indicators for each of the three dimensions. The most relevant indicators were for the participation dimension. Additionally, the tool developed has been applied to an academic conference which has been monitored in real time. The results are shown as a traffic light visualization approach, where red means bad performance, yellow average performance and green good performance, helping us to present the results for each indicator. Finally, proposals for improvement actions addressed to the red indicators are explained. The work carried out highlights the need to broaden the study of gender equality in academic conferences, not only regarding the participation but also the performance of different roles and functions.

Ambivalent Effects of Positive Contact Between Women and Men on Collective Actions for Women's Rights

Positive intergroup contact, under some conditions, can undermine the interest of members of both socially disadvantaged and advantaged groups to act for equality. However, little is known about whether similar effects appear in a unique form of intergroup relations, gender relations. In two correlational studies and two experiments, we investigated the relationships among quality of contact, perceived discrimination, fusion with the feminist movement, and willingness to engage in collective action for women's rights. For women (Study 1a), positive contact with men was associated with less perceived discrimination, less fusion, and less collective action. For men (Study 1b), the relationships were in the opposite direction. Studies 2a and 2b revealed that recalling experiences of gender discrimination nullified the effects of contact for both women and men as compared to a control condition. Thus, when discrimination is not explicitly recognized, positive contact might have sedative effects on women, but mobilizing effects on men.

The evidence gap on gendered impacts of performance-based financing among family physicians for chronic disease care: a systematic review reanalysis in contexts of single-payer universal coverage

BACKGROUND

Although pay-for-performance (P4P) among primary care physicians for enhanced chronic disease management is increasingly common, the evidence base is fragmented in terms of socially equitable impacts in achieving the quadruple aim for healthcare improvement: better population health, reduced healthcare costs, and enhanced patient and provider experiences. This study aimed to assess the literature from a systematic review on how P4P for diabetes services impacts on gender equity in patient outcomes and the physician workforce.

METHODS

A gender-based analysis was performed of studies retrieved through a systematic search of 10 abstract and citation databases plus grey literature sources for P4P impact assessments in multiple languages over the period January 2000 to April 2018, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The study was restricted to single-payer national health systems to minimize the risk of physicians sorting out of health organizations with a strong performance pay component. Two reviewers scored and synthesized the integration of sex and gender in assessing patient- and provider-oriented outcomes as well as the quality of the evidence.

FINDINGS

Of the 2218 identified records, 39 studies covering eight P4P interventions in seven countries were included for analysis. Most (79%) of the studies reported having considered sex/gender in the design, but only 28% presented sex-disaggregated patient data in the results of the P4P assessment models, and none (0%) assessed the interaction of patients' sex with the policy intervention. Few (15%) of the studies controlled for the provider's sex, and none (0%) discussed impacts of P4P on the work life of providers from a gender perspective (e.g., pay equity).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a dearth of evidence on gender-based outcomes of publicly funded incentivizing physician payment schemes for chronic disease care. As the popularity of P4P to achieve health system goals continues to grow, so does the risk of unintended consequences. There is a critical need for research integrating gender concerns to help inform performance-based health workforce financing policy options in the era of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Is the Political Slant of Psychology Research Related to Scientific Replicability?

Social science researchers are predominantly liberal, and critics have argued this representation may reduce the robustness of research by embedding liberal values into the research process. In an adversarial collaboration, we examined whether the political slant of research findings in psychology is associated with lower rates of scientific replicability. We analyzed 194 original psychology articles reporting studies that had been subject to a later replication attempt ( N = 1,331,413 participants across replications) by having psychology doctoral students (Study 1) and an online sample of U.S. residents (Study 2) from across the political spectrum code the political slant (liberal vs. conservative) of the original research abstracts. The methods and analyses were preregistered. In both studies, the liberal or conservative slant of the original research was not associated with whether the results were successfully replicated. The results remained consistent regardless of the ideology of the coder. Political slant was unrelated to both subsequent citation patterns and the original study’s effect size and not consistently related to the original study’s sample size. However, we found modest evidence that research with greater political slant—whether liberal or conservative—was less replicable, whereas statistical robustness consistently predicted replication success. We discuss the implications for social science, politics, and replicability.

Assessment of Diversity Outcomes in American Medical School Admissions: Applying the Grutter Legitimacy Principles

In the last 30 years, except for female participation, the enrollment of Latinx, African Americans, Native Americans, Alaskan natives, and disadvantaged students in medical school has been constant; however, increasing enrollment of these minority populations is feasible, if admissions committees make two changes in approach. First, the traditional belief that matriculation merit is a linear function of past academic performance must be rejected. Second, once the threshold needed to complete medical school in four years and to pass licensing examinations at the first attempt has been met, all candidates are equally qualified, and matriculation decisions must be based, in part, on societal interests. In Grutter vs. Bollinger, the United States Supreme Court determined that graduate admission committees can and should consider societal interests. Each admission decision represents a substantial government investment in each student, as the Medicare Act directly subsidizes much of the cost of medical education. As Grutter explained, there is a societal interest in the public having confidence in, and access to, the medical school training that will prepare tomorrow’s medical, professional, and political leaders. Our analysis suggests that medical school admissions are biased towards academic achievement in matriculants, beyond acceptable thresholds for graduation and licensure. We believe medical schools must shift their admissions strategies and consider noncognitive factors in all candidates as determinative once minimum acceptable academic standards have been met.

Research performance and age explain less than half of the gender pay gap in New Zealand universities

We use a globally unique dataset that scores every individual academic's holistic research performance in New Zealand to test several common explanations for the gender pay gap in universities. We find a man's odds of being ranked professor or associate professor are more than double a woman's with similar recent research score, age, field, and university. We observe a lifetime gender pay gap of ~NZ$400,000, of which research score and age explain less than half. Our ability to examine the full spectrum of research performance allows us to reject the 'male variability hypothesis' theory that the preponderance of men amongst the 'superstars' explains the lifetime performance pay gap observed. Indeed women whose research career trajectories resemble men's still get paid less than men. From 2003-12, women at many ranks improved their research scores by more than men, but moved up the academic ranks more slowly. We offer some possible explanations for our findings, and show that the gender gap in universities will never disappear in most academic fields if current hiring practices persist.

The Uses of Herbaria in Botanical Research. A Review Based on Evidence From Argentina

Botanists, a section of the broad universe of researchers in Biology, are intensive users of herbaria. Presumably, all botanists use herbaria, with greater or lesser frequency and intensity, in the development of their research. In this article, we will try to prove this statement. For this purpose, an institutional history of Botany and herbaria in Argentina is presented. This study will also show that there are other fields of knowledge in which the herbarium has a role as an input, or data source, for research (e.g. agronomy, ethnobotany, medicine). On the other hand, it will be demonstrated that, in addition to the uses of the herbarium in basic science, this institution has a crucial role in the knowledge and preservation of biodiversity, and in the improvement of species for commercial use.

Achieving Gender and Social Equality: More Than Gender Parity Is Needed

In this Perspective, the authors review Association of American Medical Colleges data on gender parity and intersectionality, consider the literature on gender parity in academic medicine and the underlying gender norms that explain these statistics, and offer recommendations for moving past indicators of parity to achieve gender and social equality.Improvements in gender parity among medical school graduates have not translated to gender parity among practicing physicians or medical school faculty, particularly for racial/ethnic minorities. Further, gender parity does not correspond to gender equality, such that gender-based disparities in salaries and advancement persist. In addition, social norms related to traditional gender role expectations reinforce existing biases and lead to sexual harassment and discrimination against women in the workplace.Building on their analysis of existing data and the literature, the authors offer concrete recommendations to achieve gender equality in academic medicine that not only improve parity but also support policies and practices to address the norms that further bias and discrimination. These recommendations include the collection, monitoring, and open reporting of data on salaries as well as on sex and race/ethnicity; stronger policies related to family leave and sexual discrimination and harassment; and accountability structures to ensure that policies are enforced. While these efforts alone cannot eliminate gender inequalities, academic medicine should be at the forefront of creating a climate in medicine that is supportive of gender equality as part of their larger goal of promoting social equality.

A Bibliometric Study of Authorship and Collaboration Trends Over the Past 30 Years in Four Major Musculoskeletal Science Journals

This study explored changes in bibliometric variables over the last 30 years for four major musculoskeletal science journals (BONE®), Calcified Tissue International® (CTI®), Journal of Bone and Mineral Research® (JBMR®), and Journal of Orthopaedic Research® (JOR®), with a specific focus on author gender. Bibliometric data were collected for all manuscripts in 1985 (BONE®, CTI®, JOR®), 1986 (JBMR®), 1995, 2005, and 2015; 2776 manuscripts met inclusion criteria. Manuscripts from Europe were more often published in BONE® or CTI®, while those from North America in JBMR® or JOR®. All journals demonstrated an increase over time in the number of authors (3.67-7.3), number of countries (1.1-1.4), number of institutions (1.4-3.1), and number of references (25.1-45.4). The number of manuscript pages increased (6.6-8.9) except for JOR® which showed a decline. CTI® had the lowest number of authors (4.9 vs. 5.6-6.8). There was a change in the corresponding author position from first to last for all journals; this change was highest for CTI® (35%) and lowest for BONE® (14.0%). All journals demonstrated an increase over time in female authors; however, CTI® was the highest amongst these four journals. The percentage of female first authors rose from 24.6 to 44.3% (CTI® 29.1-52.3%). The percentage of corresponding female authors rose from 17.5 to 33.6% (CTI® 22.9-40.0%). The proportion of female authors is increasing, likely reflecting the increasing number of women obtaining doctorates in science, medicine, and engineering.