Literature DB >> 11330148

[Why researchers excluded women from their trial populations].

M Söderström1.   

Abstract

Women are still, but to a lesser extent than twenty years ago, excluded as subjects of medical research on diseases that are prevalent among both men and women. To discover the basis on which women were excluded, the research ethics committee requested a written explanation. In all, 26 such project applications were identified during 1997-1999 (2% of the total number of applications during the period). Most researchers had more than one reason for exclusion. Qualitative analysis revealed that these explanations could be grouped into three categories, depending on whether women were excluded for scientific, historical or economic reasons. The scientific reasons correspond mainly to a lack of pertinent knowledge of the physiology and metabolism of women of childbearing age. Consequently, results lacked external validity. Perhaps the lack of knowledge of women's physiology and metabolism could be explained by a lack of female experimental animals in pre-clinical studies. One notes however a general concern not to harm women of childbearing age. The historical reasons underlie the tendency to repeat studies on former study populations that happened to be composed of men. Finally, tight research budgets restricted the participation of women but not of men. The Swedish Medical Research Council issued a policy document in 1998 to the effect that research ethics committees could require additional information concerning choice of study population. This study demonstrates an avoidable occurrence of gender bias in medical research.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11330148

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lakartidningen        ISSN: 0023-7205


  5 in total

Review 1.  A 15-Year Review of Trends in Representation of Female Subjects in Islamic Bioethics Research.

Authors:  Zeenat Hussain; Edyta Kuzian; Naveed Hussain
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2017-02

2.  Gender bias in research: how does it affect evidence based medicine?

Authors:  Anita Holdcroft
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 3.  Ethics in exercise science research.

Authors:  Roy J Shephard
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Gender-Specific Response in Pain and Function to Biologic Treatment of Knee Osteoarthritis: A Gender-Bias-Mitigated, Observational, Intention-to-Treat Study at Two Years.

Authors:  Tiffanie-Marie Borg; Nima Heidari; Ali Noorani; Mark Slevin; Angela Cullen; Stefano Olgiati; Alberto Zerbi; Alessandro Danovi; Adrian Wilson
Journal:  Stem Cells Int       Date:  2021-02-25       Impact factor: 5.443

5.  From Learning to Relearning: A Framework for Diminishing Bias in Social Robot Navigation.

Authors:  Juana Valeria Hurtado; Laura Londoño; Abhinav Valada
Journal:  Front Robot AI       Date:  2021-03-24
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.