Female and male brains differ. Differences begin early during development due to a combination of genetic and hormonal events and continue throughout the lifespan of an individual. Although researchers from a myriad of disciplines are beginning to appreciate the importance of considering sex differences in the design and interpretation of their studies, this is an area that is full of potential pitfalls. A female's reproductive status and ovarian cycle have to be taken into account when studying sex differences in health and disease susceptibility, in the pharmacological effects of drugs, and in the study of brain and behavior. To investigate sex differences in brain and behavior there is a logical series of questions that should be answered in a comprehensive investigation of any trait. First, it is important to determine that there is a sex difference in the trait in intact males and females, taking into consideration the reproductive cycle of the female. Then, one must consider whether the sex difference is attributable to the actions of gonadal steroids at the time of testing and/or is sexually differentiated permanently by the action of gonadal steroids during development. To answer these questions requires knowledge of how to assess and/or manipulate the hormonal condition of the subjects in the experiment appropriately. This article describes methods and procedures to assist scientists new to the field in designing and conducting experiments to investigate sex differences in research involving both laboratory animals and humans.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

A set of computerized tasks was used to investigate sex differences in the speed and accuracy of emotion recognition in 62 men and women of reproductive age. Evolutionary theories have posited that female superiority in the perception of emotion might arise from women's near-universal responsibility for child-rearing. Two variants of the child-rearing hypothesis predict either across-theboard female superiority in the discrimination of emotional expressions (battachment promotionQ hypothesis) or a female superiority that is restricted to expressions of negative emotion (bfitness threatQ hypothesis). Therefore, we sought to evaluate whether the expression of the sex difference is influenced by the valence of the emotional signal (Positive or Negative). The results showed that women were faster than men at recognizing both positive and negative emotions from facial cues, supporting the attachment promotion hypothesis. Support for the fitness threat hypothesis also was found, in that the sex difference was accentuated for negative emotions. There was no evidence that the female superiority was learned through previous childcare experience or that it was derived from a sex difference in simple perceptual speed. The results suggest that evolved mechanisms, not domaingeneral learning, underlie the sex difference in recognition of facial emotions.

Normal adult women showed systematic performance fluctuations across the menstrual cycle on several motor and perceptual tests that typically yield sex differences in performance. The midluteal phase, characterized by high levels of estradiol and progesterone, was associated with improved performance on tests of speeded motor coordination and impaired performance on a perceptual-spatial test, relative to performance during menses. Variations in gonadal steroid levels may contribute substantially to the sex differences reported in human cognitive and motor skills.

No abstract

Writing Committee for the REMAP-CAP Investigators IMPORTANCE The evidence for benefit of convalescent plasma for critically ill patients with COVID-19 is inconclusive.OBJECTIVE To determine whether convalescent plasma would improve outcomes for critically ill adults with COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTSThe ongoing Randomized, Embedded, Multifactorial, Adaptive Platform Trial for Community-Acquired Pneumonia (REMAP-CAP) enrolled and randomized 4763 adults with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 between March 9, 2020, and January 18, 2021, within at least 1 domain; 2011 critically ill adults were randomized to open-label interventions in the immunoglobulin domain at 129 sites in 4 countries. Follow-up ended on April 19, 2021. INTERVENTIONSThe immunoglobulin domain randomized participants to receive 2 units of high-titer, ABO-compatible convalescent plasma (total volume of 550 mL ± 150 mL) within 48 hours of randomization (n = 1084) or no convalescent plasma (n = 916). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary ordinal end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of intensive care unit-based organ support) up to day 21 (range, −1 to 21 days; patients who died were assigned -1 day). The primary analysis was an adjusted bayesian cumulative logistic model. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio (OR) greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Futility was defined as the posterior probability of an OR less than 1.2 (threshold for trial conclusion of futility >95%). An OR greater than 1 represented improved survival, more organ support-free days, or both. The prespecified secondary outcomes included in-hospital survival; 28-day survival; 90-day survival; respiratory support-free days; cardiovascular support-free days; progression to invasive mechanical ventilation, extracorporeal mechanical oxygenation, or death; intensive care unit length of stay; hospital length of stay; World Health Organization ordinal scale score at day 14; venous thromboembolic events at 90 days; and serious adverse events. RESULTS Among the 2011 participants who were randomized (median age, 61 [IQR, 52 to 70] years and 645/1998 [32.3%] women), 1990 (99%) completed the trial. The convalescent plasma intervention was stopped after the prespecified criterion for futility was met. The median number of organ support-free days was 0 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the convalescent plasma group and 3 (IQR, -1 to 16) in the no convalescent plasma group. The in-hospital mortality rate was 37.3% (401/1075) for the convalescent plasma group and 38.4% (347/904) for the no convalescent plasma group and the median number of days alive and free of organ support was 14 (IQR, 3 to 18) and 14 (IQR, 7 to 18), respectively. The median-adjusted OR was 0.97 (95% credible interval, 0.83 to 1.15) and the posterior probability of futility (OR <1.2) was 99.4% for the convalescent plasma group compared with the no convalescent plasma group. The treatment effects were consistent across the primary outcome and the 11...