Gender-related variables for health research

Abstract

Background In this paper, we argue for Gender as a Sociocultural Variable (GASV) as a complement to Sex as a Biological Variable (SABV). Sex (biology) and gender (sociocultural behaviors and attitudes) interact to influence health and disease processes across the lifespan—which is currently playing out in the COVID-19 pandemic. This study develops a gender assessment tool—the Stanford Gender-Related Variables for Health Research—for use in clinical and population research, including large-scale health surveys involving diverse Western populations. While analyzing sex as a biological variable is widely mandated, gender as a sociocultural variable is not, largely because the field lacks quantitative tools for analyzing the influence of gender on health outcomes. Methods We conducted a comprehensive review of English-language measures of gender from 1975 to 2015 to identify variables across three domains: gender norms, gender-related traits, and gender relations. This yielded 11 variables tested with 44 items in three US cross-sectional survey populations: two internet-based (N = 2051; N = 2135) and a patient-research registry (N = 489), conducted between May 2017 and January 2018. Results Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses reduced 11 constructs to 7 gender-related variables: caregiver strain, work strain, independence, risk-taking, emotional intelligence, social support, and discrimination. Regression analyses, adjusted for age, ethnicity, income, education, sex assigned at birth, and self-reported gender identity, identified associations between these gender-related variables and self-rated general health, physical and mental health, and health-risk behaviors. Conclusion Our new instrument represents an important step toward developing more comprehensive and precise survey-based measures of gender in relation to health. Our questionnaire is designed to shed light on how specific gender-related behaviors and attitudes contribute to health and disease processes, irrespective of—or in addition to—biological sex and self-reported gender identity. Use of these gender-related variables in experimental studies, such as clinical trials, may also help us understand if gender factors play an important role as treatment-effect modifiers and would thus need to be further considered in treatment decision-making.

Female authorship of covid-19 research in manuscripts submitted to 11 biomedical journals: cross sectional study

“…Further research in this area should try to integrate a broader definition of gender; however, for this to be conducted in large samples, these data will need to be self-reported routinely on journal submission systems. 28 More generally, a greater need exists to evaluate the role of gender, ethnicity, and cultural diversity on many aspects of the production of science. 29 Finally, we excluded duplicate manuscript submissions by identifying those that were transferred to another journal and removed those with an identical title and a submission date later than the original.…”

“…However, by using software that determines gender in a binary form—namely, “male” and “female” based solely on name and country—we were unable to take into account the gender identity of individuals and may have misrepresented people with diverse gender identities. Further research in this area should try to integrate a broader definition of gender; however, for this to be conducted in large samples, these data will need to be self-reported routinely on journal submission systems 28. More generally, a greater need exists to evaluate the role of gender, ethnicity, and cultural diversity on many aspects of the production of science 29.…”

Sex and gender considerations in reporting guidelines for health research: a systematic review

“…Tannenbaum et al found that only 35% of Canadian clinical practice guidelines (published between 2013 and 2015 for noncommunicable health conditions) that included “sex” and/or “gender” used the terms correctly [ 5 ] according to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research guidelines [ 29 ]. This result was expected, because only recently (in the 2010s) has a clear distinction between sex and gender, particularly in health research, reached the mainstream [ 7 , 29 , 31 , 32 , 36 – 42 ]. Indeed, we found a modest increase in the use of “sex” and “gender” over time.…”

Virtual Reality-Based Alcohol Prevention in Adolescents: A Systematic Review

“…Hence, it is of interest, how VR approaches considered gender. Gender is understood here as a complex [16,20], intersectional [21], and relational [22] psycho-socio-cultural variable with more than two possible expressions, including diversity as well as within-group heterogeneity [23,24]. Current research that addresses gender-sensitive approaches in health reports refers to a similar conceptualization of gender [22].…”