↓ Skip to main content

Twenty years and still counting: including women as participants and studying sex and gender in biomedical research

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Women's Health, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#4 of 2,344)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
50 news outlets
blogs
5 blogs
twitter
27 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
200 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
262 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Twenty years and still counting: including women as participants and studying sex and gender in biomedical research
Published in
BMC Women's Health, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12905-015-0251-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolyn M. Mazure, Daniel P. Jones

Abstract

This paper chronicles attempts in the United States over the past 20 years to fully represent women in clinical trials and ensure the study of sex and gender in biomedical research. We maintain that productive science with the aim of serving the public health requires examining the influence of sex and gender on health outcomes. This section provides a historical perspective on the changes in recommendations and requirements of both the National Institutes of Health - the world's largest single funder of biomedical research - and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration - the world's most influential regulator of drugs and medical devices - for the acceptable conduct of research as it relates to sex and gender. We also cite all reports by the U.S. Institute of Medicine and the U.S. Congress' General Accountability Office issued from 1990 to the present on the inclusion of sex and gender in research, and selected high-impact published studies that illustrate and document the paucity of, yet the need for, inclusion of females and consideration of sex and gender in research across an array of biomedical disciplines. The key message of this paper is that it has been 20 years since the first requirements to include women as well as men in clinical trials and analyze results by sex were mandated by a U.S. federal law, yet not nearly enough progress has been made. Recent signs of potential change in both policy and practice of scientific inquiry suggest much more progress may be within reach. However, awaiting a cultural shift to allow the study of sex and gender to be embraced is not seen as an effective strategy for change. Rather, specific instrumental recommendations are offered for how to include the study of sex and gender in research so as to increase our understanding and promotion of health for the benefit of all.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 262 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 259 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 40 15%
Student > Bachelor 35 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 11%
Researcher 24 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 23 9%
Other 38 15%
Unknown 72 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 40 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 8%
Psychology 20 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 7%
Social Sciences 17 6%
Other 63 24%
Unknown 83 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 432. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2024.
All research outputs
#67,055
of 25,709,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Women's Health
#4
of 2,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#799
of 295,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Women's Health
#1
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,709,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,344 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 295,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.