CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 107Sex and Gender in HealthcareDiversity and Career in MedicineGender, Health, and Social Inequality

Sex and gender matter in health research: addressing health inequities in health research reporting

Open access
Gahagan, Jacqueline, Gray, Kimberly, Whynacht, Ardath·2015·International Journal for Equity in Health
DOI 10.1186/s12939-015-0144-4PMC PMC4320818
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Attention to the concepts of 'sex' and 'gender' is increasingly being recognized as contributing to better science through an augmented understanding of how these factors impact on health inequities and related health outcomes. However, the ongoing lack of conceptual clarity in how sex and gender constructs are used in both the design and reporting of health research studies remains problematic. Conceptual clarity among members of the health research community is central to ensuring the appropriate use of these concepts in a manner that can advance our understanding of the sex- and gender-based health implications of our research findings. During the past twenty-five years much progress has been made in reducing both sex and gender disparities in clinical research and, to a significant albeit lesser extent, in basic science research. Why, then, does there remain a lack of uptake of sex- and gender-specific reporting of health research findings in many health research journals? This question, we argue, has significant health equity implications across all pillars of health research, from biomedical and clinical research, through to health systems and population health.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12939-015-0144-4

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Public policies in gender and health commonly use categorical interpretations of gender that are insufficient to make the active role of gender visible as a social process that needs to be recognized in all its complexity as a determinant of health.

    “However, public policies in gender and health commonly use categorical interpretations of gender that are still insufficient to make the active role of gender visible as a social process that needs to be recognized in all its complexity as a determinant of health (Gahagan et al., 2015).”

    From Health From a Gender Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Gahagan et al., 2015

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Sex and gender are clearly distinct and not interchangeable, though they are sometimes confused and used interchangeably in contemporary scientific literature.

    “The concepts of sex and gender, although related, are clearly distinct and not interchangeable; however, they are sometimes confused and used interchangeably in contemporary scientific literature.”

    From Health From a Gender Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Gahagan, Gray, & Whynacht, 2015

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [1]Institute of Medicine Sex-specific reporting of scientific research: A workshop summary 2012 Washington, DC The National Academies Press 22379657
  2. [5]European Association of Science Editors (EASE). EASE/ISTME joint conference: synopsis of gender session. Sept 24, 2013, Blankenberge, Belgium. 2013. http://www.ease.org.uk/sites/default/files/gender_session_summary_and_presentations.pdf. Accessed 30 July 2014.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gahagan, J., Gray, K., & Whynacht, A.
Affiliations
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • University of Toronto (CA)
  • Mount Allison University (CA)
Corresponding author
Gray, Kimberly
ORCID
Venue
International Journal for Equity in Health
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2015-01-31
Volume
14
Issue
1
Pages
12-12
ISSN
1475-9276 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s12939-015-0144-4
PMC
PMC4320818
OpenAlex
W2155660428
Cited by
107
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 3
FWCI
8.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal for Equity in Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • TSpace (University of Toronto) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  • Institute of Gender and Health
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 › Sociology and Political Science › Gender, Health, and Social Inequality
Keywords
sex differences, gender differences, health disparities, sex-disaggregated data, gender-disaggregated data, research design, conceptual clarity, health equity, clinical research, population health
MeSH terms
Health Equity, Gender Identity, Humans, Public Health, Research, Sex Factors, Sexism

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