Operationalization and Reporting Practices in Manuscripts Addressing Gender Differences in Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Bibliographical Study

Lori van den Hurk, Sarah Hiltner and Sabine Oertelt-Prigione ()
Additional contact information
Lori van den Hurk: Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Sarah Hiltner: Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands
Sabine Oertelt-Prigione: Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 21, 1-13

Abstract: Historically, authors in the biomedical field have often conflated the terms sex and gender in their research significantly limiting the reproducibility of the reported results. In the present study, we investigated current reporting practices around gender in biomedical publications that claim the identification of “gender differences”. Our systematic research identified 1117 articles for the year 2019. After random selection of 400 publications and application of inclusion criteria, 302 articles were included for analysis. Using a systematic evaluation grid, we assessed the provided methodological detail in the operationalization of gender and the provision of gender-related information throughout the manuscript. Of the 302 articles, 69 (23%) solely addressed biological sex. The remaining articles investigated gender, yet only 15 (6.5%) offered reproducible information about the operationalization of the gender dimension studied. Followingly, these manuscripts also provided more detailed gender-specific background, analyses and discussions compared to the ones not detailing the operationalization of gender. Overall, our study demonstrated persistent inadequacies in the conceptual understanding and methodological operationalization of gender in the biomedical field. Methodological rigor correlated with more nuanced and informative reporting, highlighting the need for appropriate training to increase output quality and reproducibility in the field.

Keywords: sex; gender; report; operationalization; qualitative; methodology; reproducibility (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14299/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/21/14299/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:21:p:14299-:d:960429

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().