Abstract
Objectives
The objective of the study was to assess female representation in primary studies
underpinning recommendations from clinical guidelines and systematic reviews for sepsis
treatment in adults.
Study Design and Setting
We conducted a bibliometric study. We removed studies pertaining to sex-specific diseases
and included quasirandomized, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and observational
studies. We analyzed the female participation-to-prevalence ratio (PPR).
Results
We included 277 studies published between 1973 and 2017. For the 246 studies for which
sex data were available, the share of female participation was 40%. Females overall
were under-represented relative to their share of the sepsis population (PPR 0.78).
Disaggregated results were reported by sex in 57 studies. In univariate analyses,
non–intensive care unit setting and consideration of other social health determinants
were significantly associated with greater female participation (P < 0.001 and P = 0.023, respectively). In regression models, studies published in 1996 or later
were likely to report sex, while RCTs were unlikely to do so (P = 0.019 and P < 0.001, respectively).
Conclusion
Our study points to female underenrollment in sepsis studies. Primary studies underpinning
recommendations for sepsis have poorly reported their findings by sex.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Severe sepsis epidemiology: sampling, selection, and society.Crit Care. 2004; 8: 222-226
- Assessment of global incidence and mortality of hospital-treated sepsis. Current estimates and limitations.Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016; 193: 259-272
- Nationwide trends of severe sepsis in the 21st century (2000-2007).Chest. 2011; 140: 1223-1231
- Incidence and trends of sepsis in US hospitals using clinical vs claims data, 2009-2014.JAMA. 2017; 318: 1241-1249
- Epidemiology of severe sepsis: 2008-2012.J Crit Care. 2016; 31: 58-62
- The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3).JAMA. 2016; 315: 801
- Community-onset sepsis and its public health burden: a systematic review.Syst Rev. 2016; 5: 81
- Systematic review of gender-dependent outcomes in sepsis.Nurs Crit Care. 2017; 22: 284-292
- Racial differences in colorectal cancer mortality: the importance of stage and socioeconomic status.J Clin Epidemiol. 2001; 54: 359-366
- Systematic reviews reveal unrepresentative evidence for the development of drug formularies for poor and nonwhite populations.J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62: 1268-1278
- Historical background of clinical trials involving women and minorities.Acad Med. 1994; 69: 695-698
- Women’s involvement in clinical trials: historical perspective and future implications.Pharm Pract (Granada). 2016; 14: 708
- The new NIH and FDA medical research policies: targeting gender, promoting justice.J Health Polit Policy Law. 1999; 24: 531-565
- Office of Research on Women’s Health. Report of the Advisory Committee on Research on Women’s Health, Fiscal Years 2017–2018: Office of Research on Women’s Health and NIH Support for Research on Women’s Health.National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD2019
- Under-representation of women in high-impact published clinical cancer research.Cancer. 2009; 115: 3293-3301
- Status of women in cardiovascular clinical trials.Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2009; 29: 279-283
- Participation of women and sex analyses in late-phase clinical trials of new molecular entity drugs and biologics approved by the FDA in 2007-2009.J Womens Health. 2013; 22: 604-616
- A systematic review of the inclusion (or exclusion) of women in HIV research: from clinical studies of antiretrovirals and vaccines to cure strategies.J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2016; 71: 181-188
- Participation of women in clinical trials supporting FDA approval of cardiovascular drugs.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 71: 1960-1969
- Appraising the evidence: applying sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) to Cochrane systematic reviews on cardiovascular diseases.J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2010; 19: 997-1003
- Sex-related reporting in randomised controlled trials in medical journals.Lancet. 2016; 388: 2839-2840
- Sex/gender reporting and analysis in Campbell and Cochrane systematic reviews: a cross-sectional methods study.Syst Rev. 2018; 7
- Adverse drug reactions to guideline-recommended heart failure drugs in women: a systematic review of the literature.JACC Hear Fail. 2019; 7: 258-266
- Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2019; 19
- One and a half million medical papers reveal a link between author gender and attention to gender and sex analysis.Nat Hum Behav. 2017; 1: 791-796
- Association of author gender with sex bias in surgical research.JAMA Surg. 2018; 153: 663-670
- Factors affecting sex-related reporting in medical research: a cross-disciplinary bibliometric analysis.Lancet. 2019; 393: 550-559
- Inclusion of women in sepsis research: a bibliometric analysis from systematic reviews and guidelines.Int Prospect Regist Syst Rev. 2019; (CRD42020148157)
- Sepsis: recognition, assessment and early management (NICE Guideline 51).(Available at)
- Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock.Crit Care Med. 2016; 45: 486-552
- What a difference sex and gender make: a gender, sex and health research casebook - CIHR. Ottowa, Canada can Institutes Heal Res.(Available at)
- Mendeley [Computer program]. Version 1.17.11. Last accesed 26/02/2020. Elseiver, New York2019
- Covidence systematic review software. Veritas health innovation, Melbourne, Australia.(Available at)www.covidence.orgDate accessed: September 30, 2019
- Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use.Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016; 1: 2
- Global gender disparities in science.Nature. 2013; 504: 211-213
- CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.BMJ. 2010; 340: 698-702
- How to study the impact of sex and gender in medical research: a review of resources.Biol Sex Differ. 2016; 7
- Demographics of clinical trials participants in pivotal clinical trials for new molecular entity drugs and biologics approved by FDA from 2010 to 2012.Am J Ther. 2015; 22: 435-455
- Enrollment and retention of men and women in health services research and development trials.Womens Health Issues. 2019; 29: S121-S130
- Sepsis, Data & Reports.(Available at)
- The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000.N Engl J Med. 2003; 16: 1546-1554
- The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies.PLoS Med. 2007; 4: 1623-1627
- Publication of NIH funded trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional analysis.BMJ. 2012; 344: d7292
- Publication and reporting of clinical trial results: cross sectional analysis across academic medical centers.BMJ. 2016; 352: i637
- Age of data at the time of publication of contemporary clinical trials.JAMA Netw Open. 2018; 1: e181065
- Sepsis in intensive care unit patients: worldwide data from the intensive care over nations audit.Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018; 5: ofy313
- Applying an equity lens to interventions: using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health.J Clin Epidemiol. 2014; 67: 56-64
- New country classification by income level: 2019-2020.(Available at)
- 目标指导下治疗脓毒性休克的疗 效观察［ J］.中华危重病急救医学. 2006; 18: 661-664
- 危重病严重脓毒症/脓毒性休克患者早期规范化液体复苏治疗——多中心、前瞻 性、随机、对照研究［ J］.中华危重病急救医学. 2010; 22: 331-334
- Sex, age, race and intervention type in clinical studies of HIV cure: a systematic review.AIDS Res Hum Retroviruses. 2015; 31: 85-97
- Multimorbidity patterns in the elderly - a new approach of disease clustering.PLoS One. 2010; 5: e15941
- Comorbidity patterns in patients with chronic diseases in general practice.PLoS One. 2012; 7: e32141
- Age and sex in drug development and testing for adults.Pharmacol Res. 2017; 121: 83-93
- The effect of race and sex on physicians’ recommendations for cardiac catheterization.N Engl J Med. 1999; 340: 618-626
- Sex-and age-based differences in the delivery and outcomes of critical care.CMAJ. 2007; 177: 1513-1519
- HIV providers’ perceptions of and attitudes toward female versus male patients.AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2012; 26: 582-588
- More men than women are admitted to 9 intensive care units in British Columbia.J Crit Care. 2009; 24 (630.e1-630.e8)
- Diversity in clinical and biomedical research: a promise yet to be fulfilled.PLoS Med. 2015; 12: e1001918
- The more things change, the more they stay the same: a study to evaluate compliance with inclusion and assessment of women and minorities in randomized controlled trials.Acad Med. 2018; 93: 630-635
- How current reporting practices may mask differences: a call for examining cancer-specific demographic enrollment patterns in cancer treatment clinical trials.Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2019; 16: 100476
- Women’shealth: women sufficiently represented in new drug testing, but FDA oversight needs improvement.(Available at)
- Participation of women in clinical trials for new drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2000-2002.J Womens Health. 2009; 18: 303-310
- Reporting of sex and gender in randomized controlled trials in Canada: a cross-sectional methods study.Res Integr Peer Rev. 2017; 2: 15
- After inclusion, information and inference: reporting on clinical trials results after 15 years of monitoring inclusion of women.J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2011; 20: 829-836
- Doubly blind: a systematic review of gender in randomised controlled trials.Glob Health Action. 2016; 9
- Female sex as an important determinant of lisinopril-induced cough.Lancet. 1992; 339: 372
- Metoprolol CR/XL in female patients with heart failure: analysis of the experience in metoprolol extended-release randomized intervention trial in heart failure (MERIT-HF).Circulation. 2002; 105: 1585-1591
- Cardiovascular disease in women: clinical perspectives.Circ Res. 2016; 118: 1273-1293
- Changes in prescribing and healthcare resource utilization after FDA Drug Safety Communications involving zolpidem-containing medications.Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2017; 26: 712-721
- Sex based subgroup differences in randomized controlled trials: empirical evidence from Cochrane meta-analyses.BMJ. 2016; 355
- Does a change in health research funding policy related to the integration of sex and gender have an impact?.PLoS One. 2014; 9e99900
- NIH to balance sex in cell and animal studies.Nature. 2014; 509: 282-283
- Health Portfolio sex and gender-based analysis policy.(Available at)https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/corporate/transparency/corporate-management-reporting/heath-portfolio-sex-gender-based-analysis-policy.htmlDate: 2010Date accessed: January 10, 2020
- ERA-NET Cofund Promoting Gender Equality in H2020 and the ERA. Eur Comm.(Available at)https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/741874Date accessed: January 10, 2020
- Fairness to all: gender and sex in scientific reporting.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472: 391-392
- Reporting sex, gender, or both in clinical research?.JAMA. 2016; 316: 1863-1864
- Schiebinger L. Klinge I. Paik H.Y. Sánchez de Madariaga I. Schraudner M. Stefanick M. Gendered innovations in science, health & medicine, engineering, and environment. 2018 (Available at)genderedinnovations.stanford.eduDate accessed: January 10, 2020
- Surviving sepsis campaign: association between performance metrics and outcomes in a 7.5-year study.Crit Care Med. 2015; 43: 3-12
Article info
Publication history
Published online: June 16, 2020
Accepted:
June 12,
2020
Footnotes
Funding: A.A.M. was funded by the Instituto de Salud Carlos III through the “Acción Estratégica en Salud 2013–2016/Contratos Río Hortega convocatoria 2018/CM18/00141” (co-funded by European Social Fund 2014–2020, “Investing in your future”). This funding source had no role in the design of this review, its execution, analysis, interpretation of the data, or the decision to submit results.
Ethical approval: Ethical permission was not necessary as this study used only published data.
Conflict of interest: None.
Identification
Copyright
© 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
