Sex and gender-based analysis and diversity metric reporting in acute care trials published in high-impact journals: a systematic review

• Published in: BMJ open 2024-05, Vol.14 (5), p.e081118
• Main Authors: Granton, David, Rodrigues, Myanca, Raparelli, Valeria, Honarmand, Kimia, Agarwal, Arnav, Friedrich, Jan O, Perna, Benedetta, Spaggiari, Riccardo, Fortunato, Valeria, Risdonne, Gianluca, Kho, Michelle, VanderKaay, Sandra, Chaudhuri, Dipayan, Gomez-Builes, Carolina, D'Aragon, Frédérick, Wiseman, Daniel, Lau, Vincent Issac, Lin, Celina, Reid, Julie, Trivedi, Vatsal, Prakash, Varuna, Belley-Cote, Emilie, Al Mandhari, Maha, Thabane, Lehana, Pilote, Louise, Burns, Karen E A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cardiology; Clinical trials; Clinical Trials as Topic; Critical Care - statistics & numerical data; Emergency medical care; Employment; Ethnicity; Female; Females; Gender Equity; Gender identity; Health Equity; Humans; Inclusion; INTENSIVE & CRITICAL CARE; Intensive Care; Intervention; Journal Impact Factor; Male; Medicine; Multiculturalism & pluralism; Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data; Sex Factors; Systematic review; Terminology; Womens health
• ISSN: 2044-6055; 2044-6055
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-081118

ObjectiveTo characterise sex and gender-based analysis (SGBA) and diversity metric reporting, representation of female/women participants in acute care trials and temporal changes in reporting before and after publication of the 2016 Sex and Gender Equity in Research guideline.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE for trials published in five leading medical journals in 2014, 2018 and 2020.Study selectionTrials that enrolled acutely ill adults, compared two or more interventions and reported at least one clinical outcome.Data abstraction and synthesis4 reviewers screened citations and 22 reviewers abstracted data, in duplicate. We compared reporting differences between intensive care unit (ICU) and cardiology trials.ResultsWe included 88 trials (75 (85.2%) ICU and 13 (14.8%) cardiology) (n=111 428; 38 140 (34.2%) females/women). Of 23 (26.1%) trials that reported an SGBA, most used a forest plot (22 (95.7%)), were prespecified (21 (91.3%)) and reported a sex-by-intervention interaction with a significance test (19 (82.6%)). Discordant sex and gender terminology were found between headings and subheadings within baseline characteristics tables (17/32 (53.1%)) and between baseline characteristics tables and SGBA (4/23 (17.4%)). Only 25 acute care trials (28.4%) reported race or ethnicity. Participants were predominantly white (78.8%) and male/men (65.8%). No trial reported gendered-social factors. SGBA reporting and female/women representation did not improve temporally. Compared with ICU trials, cardiology trials reported significantly more SGBA (15/75 (20%) vs 8/13 (61.5%) p=0.005).ConclusionsAcute care trials in leading medical journals infrequently included SGBA, female/women and non-white trial participants, reported race or ethnicity and never reported gender-related factors. Substantial opportunity exists to improve SGBA and diversity metric reporting and recruitment of female/women participants in acute care trials.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42022282565.