Small step for nature, giant leap across gender gap: Leading journal to mandate sex and gender reporting in research
Like many aspects of life, there remains an undercurrent of sexual bias against women in STEM fields. And this bias has a negative impact not only on women but also men – and those who do not fit into a binary category.
Nature magazines are now making the leap to sex and gender equality with new reporting requirements, and it’s a welcome step in the right direction.
I work in the field of bioengineering, and researchers like me understand first hand the damage that can happen when sex and gender are not properly accounted for – and reported in the research.
Nature Journals A New Policy
Come June, researchers who submit papers to a subset of the Nature Portfolio journals (see details here) will need to describe whether gender and gender are considered in the study design.
If no gender and gender analysis was performed, the authors would have to explain why. This would be applicable to work with human participants as well as other vertebrate animals and cell experimental studies. So just as ethics approval, clinical trial registration, or informed consent must be demonstrated where relevant, gender and gender will also be considered.
But what are sex and gender?
“Sex” and “gender” are words that are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing. Sex refers to biological characteristics, which include genetics and reproductive organs. Gender is shaped by social and cultural influences, and may or may not align with a person’s biological gender. Gender and gender can both affect our health.
Read more: How genes and evolution shape gender – and transgender – identity
Authors writing for Nature journals will also be required to submit “separate data by sex and gender” where relevant. This means that instead of the (more often than not) approach of keeping male and female data together, it will need to be separated.
This is a necessary step towards removing the differences between men and women. Researchers are encouraged to adhere to gender and gender equality in research guidelines when designing research studies.
Gender and gender equality in research guidelines is a process for reporting gender and gender information in study design, data analysis and results. Sager
Lack of sex and gender considerations puts everyone at risk
Failure to conduct sex- and gender-based analysis occurs across many disciplines. For example, in the field of engineering, car safety is designed for an average male body. This puts women at higher risk of injury and death in the event of an accident.
Another example comes with facial recognition technologies, where studies have found that the error rate for the “gender” classification is higher for women than men (and even higher for darker-skinned people).
But medicine is one of the areas that is arguably most affected by the lack of sex and gender-based reporting.
The consequences can be dire in medicine, too, where a limited understanding of gender differences in biology and disease can directly impact health. Our biological sex can make us more likely to suffer from certain diseases. This can make us react differently to internal factors (such as the medications we are taking) or external factors (such as stress). It can also make us feel pain differently.
Our sex can affect the way we manifest symptoms of similar diseases, such as heart attack and stroke. For example, heart attack symptoms in women, such as fatigue, shortness of breath, and nausea, are called “atypical,” and lead to poor treatment and outcome.
Large male bias exists at all stages of medical research. There are many reasons for this. One is that female biology can often complicate things. A woman’s hormones fluctuate monthly and throughout her life.
The second reason, historically, is protectionism. While this is almost unbelievable (but true), women of the “likely unborn” were excluded from clinical trials from 1977 to 1993 in order to protect the “potentially unborn” child.
On top of this there is simply a lack of awareness, and a historical notion (though this is eventually changing) that applies to men also applies to women.
Men can also be harmed
Sex-bias in medicine isn’t just putting women’s health at risk; It can also put men at risk. For example, osteoporosis is four times more common in women. As a result, men in this area are less screened and undiagnosed – yet they are more likely to have complications or death after a bone fracture.
The COVID-19 virus has also been shown to differ between the sexes, with males requiring intensive care treatment and at greater risk of dying. These differences raise questions about the reasons behind it.
What are the underlying gender differences causing this? Is it the immune system? Is it a difference in hormones? Much is still unknown.
We must accept gender and gender differences
A major obstacle to bridging the gender gap in health care is the lack of awareness that such a gap still exists. Gender and gender perspectives in health and biology need to be integrated into all aspects of medicine – from health research to medical education, through clinical practice. This requires a concerted effort from governments, academia and industry.
Many initiatives and institutions have been created around the world to address sex, gender and health issues, such as the Canadian Institute of Gender and Health. Australia and New Zealand need to coordinate with other countries and apply gender and gender analysis to health and medical research.
And I, for one, echo Nature’s wise words: “Accounting for sex and gender makes for better science.”
Read more: Bridging the gender gap in the life sciences is an uphill struggle
