Reporting of sex and gender in human studies published in anaesthesia journals

Sex Differences in Opioid Administration After Cardiac Surgery

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether there are sex-based differences in the administration of opioid analgesic drugs among inpatients after cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

At a tertiary academic referral center.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent cardiac surgery from 2014 to 2019.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was the cumulative oral morphine equivalent dose (OMED) for the postoperative admission. Secondary outcomes were the daily difference in OMED and the administration of nonopioid analgesics. The authors developed multivariate regression models controlling for known confounders, including weight and length of stay. A total of 3,822 patients (1,032 women and 2,790 men) were included. The mean cumulative OMED was 139 mg for women and 180 mg for men, and this difference remained significant after adjustment for confounders (adjusted mean difference [aMD], -33.21 mg; 95% CI, -47.05 to -19.36 mg; p < 0.001). The cumulative OMED was significantly lower in female patients on postoperative days 1 to 5, with the greatest disparity observed on day 5 (aMD, -89.83 mg; 95% CI, -155.9 to -23.80 mg; p = 0.009). By contrast, women were more likely to receive a gabapentinoid (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.42-2.58; p < 0.001). The authors found no association between patient sex and the administration of other nonopioid analgesics or specific types of opioid analgesics. The authors found no association between patient sex and pain scores recorded within the first 48 hours after extubation, or the number of opioids administered in close proximity to pain assessments.

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex was associated with significantly lower amounts of opioids administered after cardiac surgery.

Sex or Gender Reporting in Ophthalmology Clinical Trials Among US Food and Drug Administration Approvals, 1995 to 2022

Importance

As critical determinants of scientific rigor, reproducibility, and equity, sex and gender should be considered in clinical trial design and reporting.

Objective

To evaluate the accuracy of sex and gender reporting and extent of sex- and gender-based analysis in clinical trials associated with US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) drug approvals between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2022.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cross-sectional study of participants enrolled in FDA ophthalmology trials, the following trial documents were reviewed by pairs of independent reviewers in decreasing order of priority: peer-reviewed publication, ClinicalTrials.gov report, and FDA medical and statistical reviews. Trial protocols and supplementary materials were also reviewed.

Main Outcome and Measures

The proportion of trials that correctly applied sex and gender terminology, reported the method of assessing sex or gender, and conducted sex- or gender-based data analysis; incorrect application of sex and gender terminology was defined as interchangeable use of sex- and gender-related terms without a clear justification.

Results

Between 1995 and 2022, 34 ophthalmic drugs corresponding to 85 trials (34 740 participants) received FDA approval, of which 16 drugs (47.1%) corresponding to 32 trials (18 535 participants [37.6%]) were associated with peer-reviewed publications. Sixteen trials used sex and gender terminology correctly (19.5%). No trial reported how sex and gender were collected nor enrolled participants from sexual and gender identity minority populations. Most trials reported sex- and gender-disaggregated demographic data (96.5%), but few conducted sex- or gender-based analysis for data on dropout (1.2%), primary outcomes (28.2%), secondary outcomes (2.4%), and adverse events (9.4%). Erroneous sex and gender reporting was associated with later publication year (2008.5 vs 2001.0; median difference, 7.5; 95% CI, -6.0 to 11.0; P < .001) and higher journal influence metrics, including 2022 journal impact factor (13.7 vs 5.9; median difference, 7.8; 95% CI, -1.4 to 152.4, P < .001) and 2022 journal citation indicator (4.9 vs 2.1; median difference, 2.9; 95% CI, 0-20.0, P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this observational study, over three-quarters of ophthalmology trials associated with FDA drug approvals conflated sex and gender and over two-thirds lacked sex- and gender-based analyses. More rigorous integration of sex and gender appears warranted for FDA, and presumably other trials, to improve their validity, reproducibility, and equity.

Diversity, inclusion, and equity at the British Journal of Anaesthesia: 100 years of progress

The past century, especially the past decade, has seen re-examination and evolution in our views about sex, gender, race, and ethnicity. The British Journal of Anaesthesia is part of an ongoing effort in research and medical publishing, and in health and education more generally, to improve diversity, inclusion, and equity. This editorial highlights the contributions and evolution of the Journal in these areas from its origin until today.

Meta-analysis of donor-recipient gender profile in paediatric living donor liver transplantation

OBJECTIVE

Paediatric living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) has gained popularity due to limited deceased donor organ supply. Some studies report inequalities in donor and recipient gender profiles, but data are sparse. We evaluated LDLT donor-recipient gender profiles, comparing country income categories and gender disparity level.

DESIGN

We performed a systematic review, searching PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases for publications dated January 2006-September 2021. We included full-text English articles reporting gender in ≥40 universally sampled donor-recipient pairs. Search terms were permutations of 'liver transplant', 'living donor' and 'paediatric'. Countries were grouped as high/middle/low-income economies based on World Bank criteria and into groups based on deviation from gender parity in Gender Development Index (GDI) values (group 1 indicating closest to gender parity, group 5 indicating furthest). Proportions analysis with corresponding 95% CI were used for analysis of dichotomous variables, with significance when 95% CI did not cross 0.5. Data are reported as female proportion (%) and 95% CI.

RESULTS

Of 12 525 studies identified, 14 retrospective studies (12 countries; 6152 recipients and 6138 donors) fulfilled study inclusion criteria. Male recipient preponderance was seen in lower middle-income countries (all were also GDI group 5) (39.3 (95% CI 34.7 to 44.0)) and female recipient preponderance in GDI groups 1 and 3. Female donor preponderance was seen overall (57.4% (95% CI 55.1 to 59.6)), in middle income countries and in three of four GDI groups represented.

CONCLUSION

There are significant imbalances in recipient-donor gender profiles in paediatric LDLT that are not well explained. The reasons for overall female donor preponderance across income tiers must be scrutinised.

Inclusion, characteristics, and outcomes of male and female participants in large international perioperative studies

BACKGROUND

We compared baseline characteristics and outcomes and evaluated the subgroup effects of randomised interventions by sex in males and females in large international perioperative trials.

METHODS

Nine randomised trials and two cohort studies recruiting adult patients, conducted between 1995 and 2020, were included. Baseline characteristics and outcomes common to six or more studies were evaluated. Regression models included terms for sex, study, and an interaction between the two. Comparing outcomes without adjustment for baseline characteristics represents the 'total effect' of sex on the outcome.

RESULTS

Of 54 626 participants, 58% were male and 42% were female. Females were less likely to have ASA physical status ≥3 (56% vs 64%), to smoke (15% vs 23%), have coronary artery disease (21% vs 32%), or undergo vascular surgery (10% vs 23%). The pooled incidence of death was 1.6% in females and 1.8% in males (risk ratio [RR] 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.81-1.05; P=0.20), of myocardial infarction was 4.2% vs 4.5% (RR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.81-1.03; P=0.10), of stroke was 0.5% vs 0.6% (RR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.79-1.35; P=0.81), and of surgical site infection was 8.6% vs 8.3% (RR 1.03; 95% CI: 0.79-1.35; P=0.70). Treatment effects of three interventions demonstrated statistically significant effect modification by sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Females were in the minority in all included studies. They were healthier than males, but outcomes were comparable. Further research is needed to understand the reasons for this discrepancy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

International Registry of Meta-Research (UID: IRMR_000011; 5 January 2021).

Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers

An under-representation of women and a lack of sex-specific analyses in COVID-19 trials has been suggested. However, the higher number of men than women who are severely affected by COVID-19 and the restricted information in scientific publications may have biased these suggestions. Therefore, we evaluated sex proportionality and sex-specific efficacy and safety data in trials of COVID-19 treatments and vaccines using both publicly available regulatory documents and confidential documents used by regulators in their review of medicinal products. Included were two treatments (ie, remdesivir and dexamethasone) and four vaccines (ie, BNT162b2 mRNA (BioNTech/Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2-S (Janssen)) that received marketing authorisation by the European Commission at the time of the study conduct. An under-representation of women was shown in three of the nine data sets for one treatment (ie, remdesivir), but the proportion of women included was representative in each of the data sets for the other five products. This indicates that there is no structural under-representation of women in the COVID-19 trials. Currently, sex-specific efficacy data are available for five of the six assessed products and sex-specific safety data are available for half of the products only. It is important that this information will also be made available for the other products. There are only small differences in efficacy and safety between men and women which are likely to be of limited clinical relevance. Sex-specific efficacy information can generally be found in the publicly available regulatory documents other than the Summary of Product Characteristics, for which more awareness might be required.

Integrating sex and gender in studies of cardiac resynchronization therapy: a systematic review

Aims

To examine the prevalence, temporal changes, and impact of the National Institute of Health (NIH) Sex as a Biological Variable (SABV) policy on sex and gender reporting and analysis in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) cohort studies.

Methods and results

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science for cohort studies reporting the effectiveness and safety of CRT in heart failure patients from January 2000 to June 2020, with no language restrictions. Segmented regression analysis was used for policy analysis. We included 253 studies. Fourteen per cent considered sex in the study design. Outcome data disaggregated by sex were only reported in 17% of the studies. Of the studies with statistical models (n = 173), 57% were adjusted for sex. Sixty‐eight per cent of those reported an effect size for sex on the outcome. Sex‐stratified analyses were conducted in 13% of the studies. Temporal analysis shows an increase in sex reporting in background, statistical models, study design, and discussion. Besides statistical models, NIH SABV policy analysis showed no significant change in the reporting of sex in study sections. Gender was not reported or analysed in any study.

Conclusions

There is a need to improve the study design, analysis, and completeness of reporting of sex in CRT cohort studies. Inadequate sex integration in study design and analysis may potentially hinder progress in understanding sex disparities in CRT. Deficiencies in the integration of sex in studies could be overcome by implementing guidance that already exists.

The gender and geography of publishing: a review of sex/gender reporting and author representation in leading general medical and global health journals

Introduction

Diverse gender and geographical representation matters in research. We aimed to review medical and global health journals’ sex/gender reporting, and the gender and geography of authorship.

Methods

542 research and non-research articles from 14 selected journals were reviewed using a retrospective survey design. Paper screening and systematic data extraction was conducted with descriptive statistics and regression analyses calculated from the coded data. Outcome measures were journal characteristics, the extent to which published articles met sex/gender reporting guidelines, plus author gender and location of their affiliated institution.

Results

Five of the fourteen journals explicitly encourage sex/gender analysis in their author instructions, but this did not lead to increased sex/gender reporting beyond the gender of study participants (OR=3.69; p=0.000 (CI 1.79 to 7.60)). Just over half of research articles presented some level of sex/gender analysis, while 40% mentioned sex/gender in their discussion. Articles with women first and last authors were 2.4 times more likely to discuss sex/gender than articles with men in those positions (p=0.035 (CI 1.062 to 5.348)). First and last authors from high-income countries (HICs) were 19 times as prevalent as authors from low-income countries; and women from low-income and middle-income countries were at a disadvantage in terms of the impact factor of the journals they published in.

Conclusion

Global health and medical research fails to consistently apply a sex/gender lens and remains largely the preserve of authors in HIC. Collaborative partnerships and funding support are needed to promote gender-sensitive research and dismantle historical power dynamics in authorship.

Sex and gender differences in anesthesia: Relevant also for perioperative safety?

Sex (a biological determination) and gender (a social construct) are not interchangeable terms and both impact perioperative management and patient safety. Sex and gender differences in clinical phenotypes of chronic illnesses and risk factors for perioperative morbidity and mortality are relevant for preoperative evaluation and optimization. Sex-related differences in physiology, as well as in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anesthetic drugs may influence the anesthesia plan, the management of pain, postoperative recovery, adverse effects, patient satisfaction, and outcomes. Further studies are needed to characterize outcome differences between men and women in non-cardiac, cardiac, and transplantation surgery in order to individualize perioperative management and improve patient safety. Transgender patients represent a vulnerable population who need special perioperative care. Gender balance increases team performance and may improve perioperative outcomes.

Sex/gender and additional equity characteristics of providers and patients in perioperative anesthesia trials: a cross-sectional analysis of the literature

Sex and gender, among other equity-related characteristics, influence the process of care and patients’ outcomes. Currently, the extent to which these characteristics are considered in the anesthesia literature remains unknown. This study assesses their incorporation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anesthesia-related interventions, for both patients and healthcare providers. This is a cross-sectional analysis using an existing dataset derived from the anesthesia literature. The dataset originated from a scoping review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. RCTs investigating the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on mortality for adults undergoing surgery were included. Equity outcome measures were recorded for both patients and providers and assessed for inclusion in the study design, reporting of results, and analysis of intervention effects. Three-hundred sixty-one RCTs (n = 144,674) were included. Most RCTs (91%) reported patient sex/gender, with 58% of patients identified as male. There were 139 studies (39%), where 70% or more of the sample was male, compared to just 14 studies (4%), where 70% or more of the sample was female. Only 10 studies (3%) analyzed results by patient sex/gender, with one reporting a significant effect. There was substantial variation in how age was reported, although nearly all studies (98%) reported some measure of age. For healthcare providers, equity-related information was never available. Better consideration of sex/gender and additional health equity parameters for both patients and providers in RCTs is needed to improve evidence quality, and ultimately, patient care and outcome.

Perceptions of gender equity in departmental leadership, research opportunities, and clinical work attitudes: an international survey of 11 781 anaesthesiologists

BACKGROUND

Women make up an increasing proportion of the physician workforce in anaesthesia, but they are consistently under-represented in leadership and governance.

METHODS

We performed an internet-based survey to investigate career opportunities in leadership and research amongst anaesthesiologists. We also explored gender bias attributable to workplace attitudes and economic factors. The survey instrument was piloted, translated into seven languages, and uploaded to the SurveyMonkey® platform. We aimed to collect between 7800 and 13 700 responses from at least 100 countries. Participant consent and ethical approval were obtained. A quantitative analysis was done with χ² and Cramer's V as a measure of strength of associations. We used an inductive approach and a thematic content analysis for qualitative data on current barriers to leadership and research.

RESULTS

The 11 746 respondents, 51.3% women and 48.7% men, represented 148 countries; 35 respondents identified their gender as non-binary. Women were less driven to achieve leadership positions (P<0.001; Cramer's V: 0.11). Being a woman was reported as a disadvantage for leadership and research (P<0.001 for both; Cramer's V: 0.47 and 0.34, respectively). Women were also more likely to be mistreated in the workplace (odds ratio: 10.6; 95% confidence interval: 9.4-11.9; P<0.001), most commonly by surgeons. Several personal, departmental, institutional, and societal barriers in leadership and research were identified, and strategies to overcome them were suggested. Lower-income countries were associated with a significantly smaller gender gap (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst certain trends suggest improvements in the workplace, barriers to promotion of women in key leadership and research positions continue within anaesthesiology internationally.

Reporting and analyses of sex/gender and race/ethnicity in randomized controlled trials of interventions published in the highest-ranking anesthesiology journals

Aim: We assessed reporting of data on sex/gender and race/ethnicity in randomized controlled trials of interventions published in the highest-ranking anesthesiology journals from 2014 to 2017. Methods: We extracted data regarding terminology for sex/gender, proportion of participants according to the race/gender and race/ethnicity, and results shown for the race/gender and race/ethnicity. Results: Among the analyzed 732 trials, few stratified allocation of participants on the basis of sex/gender and race/ethnicity, few reported results for sex/gender or race/ethnicity and the outcomes reported may be influenced by one or both. Conclusion: In conclusion, outcomes of anesthesiology trials could be vulnerable to an important and avoidable source of bias; trialists need to pay more attention to sex and race/ethnicity when designing and reporting their studies.

Association of endothelial and glycocalyx injury biomarkers with fluid administration, development of acute kidney injury, and 90-day mortality: data from the FINNAKI observational study

Background

Injury to endothelium and glycocalyx predisposes to vascular leak, which may subsequently lead to increased fluid requirements and worse outcomes. In this post hoc study of the prospective multicenter observational Finnish Acute Kidney Injury (FINNAKI) cohort study conducted in 17 Finnish intensive care units, we studied the association of Syndecan-1 (SDC-1), Angiopoetin-2 (Ang-2), soluble thrombomodulin (sTM), vascular adhesion protein-1 (VAP-1) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) with fluid administration and balance among septic critical care patients and their association with development of acute kidney injury (AKI) and 90-day mortality.

Results

SDC-1, Ang-2, sTM, VAP-1 and IL-6 levels were measured at ICU admission from 619 patients with sepsis. VAP-1 decreased (p < 0.001) and IL-6 increased (p < 0.001) with increasing amounts of administered fluid, but other biomarkers did not show differences according to fluid administration. In linear regression models adjusted for IL-6, only VAP-1 was significantly associated with fluid administration on day 1 (p < 0.001) and the cumulative fluid balance on day 5/ICU discharge (p = 0.001). Of 415 patients admitted without AKI, altogether 112 patients (27.0%) developed AKI > 12 h from ICU admission (AKI_>12 h). They had higher sTM levels than patients without AKI, and after multivariable adjustment log, sTM level was associated with AKI_>12 h with OR (95% CI) of 12.71 (2.96–54.67), p = 0.001). Ninety-day non-survivors (n = 180; 29.1%) had higher SDC-1 and sTM levels compared to survivors. After adjustment for known confounders, log SDC-1 (OR [95% CI] 2.13 [1.31–3.49], p = 0.002), log sTM (OR [95% CI] 7.35 [2.29–23.57], p < 0.001), and log Ang-2 (OR [95% CI] 2.47 [1.44–4.14], p = 0.001) associated with an increased risk for 90-day mortality. Finally, patients who had high levels of all three markers, namely, SDC-1, Ang-2 and sTM, had an adjusted OR of 5.61 (95% CI 2.67–11.79; p < 0.001) for 90-day mortality.

Conclusions

VAP-1 and IL-6 associated with fluid administration on the first ICU day. After adjusting for confounders, sTM was associated with development of AKI after 12 h from ICU admission. SDC-1, Ang-2 and sTM were independently associated with an increased risk for 90-day mortality.