Scientific excellence in applying sex-and gender-sensitive methods in biomedical and health research
Open accessAbstract
Despite regulations, the attention paid to sex and gender in biomedical and health research is far from optimal. Researchers often recognize the importance of incorporating sex and gender issues in general but fail to see the applicability to their own research. This can have severe consequences and impedes gender equity in healthcare. More hands-on approaches are needed that stimulate scientists to integrate sex and gender aspects into their research. The present work is based on the contents of a workshop developed by the authors that serves as such a hands-on method. It aims at familiarizing a broad range of scientists in the field of biomedical and health research with the basics of conducting sex- and gender-sensitive research. In addition to clarifying concepts, it serves to provide a general introduction to sex- and gender-sensitive methods. To this end, challenges in pitfalls conducting sex- and gender-sensitive research, originally identified in the social sciences, are translated to the practice of biomedical and health research. Implications and applicability to all areas of biomedical and health research are shown by providing illustrative examples. Finally, a tool is presented that allows for the detection of sex and gender bias throughout all phases of the research process and shows how this bias can be overcome through sex- and gender-sensitive (1) relevance checking, (2) literature search, (3) formulation of research questions and hypotheses, (4) research meth…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The presence of gender biases in health research and their impact on health programs, projects, policies, and outcomes have been widely indicated and discussed.
“The presence of gender biases in health research and their impact on health programs, projects, policies, and outcomes have been widely indicated and discussed (Jiménez, 2014; Nieuwenhoven & Klinge, 2010; Regitz-Zagrosek, 2012; WHO, 2011a).”
From Health From a Gender Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Nieuwenhoven & Klinge, 2010
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 54 · Cited by 107
- Authors
- Nieuwenhoven, L., & Klinge, I.
- Affiliations
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Nieuwenhoven, Linda
- Klinge, Ineke
- ORCID
- Klinge, Ineke
- Venue
- Journal of Women's Health
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2010-02
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 313-321
- ISSN
- 1059-7115 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-9996
- 1931-843X
- OpenAlex
- W2074669881
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 8.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Journal of Women s Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion)
- GoeScholar The Publication Server of the Georg-August-Universität Göttingen (Georg-August-Universität Göttingen) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Sex and Gender in Healthcare
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
- Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender and Feminist Studies
- Keywords
- sex bias in research, gender equity in health care, research methodology, research question formulation, sample selection, data analysis and interpretation, research reporting
- MeSH terms
- Female, Health Services Research, Humans, Male, Prejudice, Sex Characteristics, Sex Factors, Biomedical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review