Inclusion Of Women In Research Research Articles

Unveiling the gender gap in research: a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most-cited articles on food-borne pathogen outbreaks from 1990 to 2020.

Despite a recent increase in the representation of female authors in scientific literature, a significant gap persists concerning the inclusion of women in research. This necessitates the analysis of published literature from a gender perspective. This study aimed to provide gender distribution in authorship in the 100 most-cited articles on food-borne pathogen outbreaks from 1990 to 2020. Bibliometric analysis was conducted using the Scopus database. Two reviewers were selected to search the database. We included the 100 most-cited articles on foodborne outbreak investigations. The analysis was conducted using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 and Microsoft Excel version 2016. The citation data, including total citations, citations per year, and representation of women as first and senior authors, was analyzed in terms of frequencies, mean, median, and interquartile range. The correlation between journal impact factor and the representation of women in high-impact factor journals was determined. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Most of the top-cited articles were published between 2001 and 2010 (n=47). The top 3 most-cited articles were from the USA. Of the total 100 articles, women were the first and last authors in 46% and 28% of the articles, respectively, reflecting a significant gender gap. However, the proportion of females as principal investigators gradually increased from 25% (n=10/30) to 52% (n=24/47) during the period 2001-2010 and to 92% (n=12/13) during 2011-2020. The USA had the highest number of included articles (n=48), and women were principal authors in 56% (n=27) of them. The lowest representation of women was observed in Austria, Denmark, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nigeria, Portugal, and the United Kingdom. Women are under-represented in published literature on food-borne pathogen outbreaks. Although the representation of women as principal authors has recently increased, disparities still exist at the senior-author level, calling for women's advancement in academic science.

Prioritise research on vaccines for pregnant and breastfeeding women

Prioritise research on vaccines for pregnant and breastfeeding women

The Academic Profession from a Gender Perspective in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics in Mexico

This is a descriptive and comparative document obtained from a national database resulting from the “APIKS”, Academic Profession in the Knowldge-Basic Society survey which analyses the incidence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, from the perspective of professors in Mexican universities. We will analyse the inclusion of women in research. Also, we will describe the changes that have been occurring in the forms and conditions of academic work, activities, performance, productivity, and degree of satisfaction nationwide. The sample that was studied was 3776 professors from the different higher education subsystems.

Brain responsivity to emotional faces differs in men and women with and without a history of alcohol use disorder.

Inclusion of women in research on Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) has shown that gender differences contribute to unique profiles of cognitive, emotional, and neuropsychological dysfunction. We employed functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of abstinent individuals with a history of AUD (21 women [AUDw], 21 men [AUDm]) and demographically similar non-AUD control (NC) participants without AUD (21 women [NCw], 21 men [NCm]) to explore how gender and AUD interact to influence brain responses during emotional processing and memory. Participants completed a delayed match-to-sample emotional face memory fMRI task, and brain activation contrasts between a fixation stimulus and pictures of emotional face elicited a similar overall pattern of activation for all four groups. Significant Group by Gender interactions revealed two activation clusters. A cluster in an anterior portion of the middle and superior temporal gyrus, elicited lower activation to the fixation stimulus than to faces for the AUDw as compared to the NCw; that abnormality was more pronounced than the one observed for men. Another cluster in the medial portion of the superior frontal cortex elicited higher activation to the faces by AUDm than NCm, a difference that was more evident than the one observed for women. Together, these findings have added new evidence of AUD-related gender differences in neural responses to facial expressions of emotion.

The role of male partners in women\u2019s participation in research during pregnancy: a case study from the partners demonstration project

The exclusion of pregnant women from health research remains a significant challenge globally. In settings where cultural traditions and gender norms support a more restricted decision-making role for women in general, little is known about the attitudes of male partners toward the inclusion of women in research during pregnancy. Understanding the expectations of both men and women in such cultural settings offers an opportunity to engage and address local ethical concerns to improve women’s access to research during pregnancy and enhance intervention development. In this paper, we present a qualitative research ethics case study, drawn from the Partners Demonstration Project of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) in Kenya, regarding the role of male partners in decision-making to continue PrEP during pregnancy. PrEP is an effective HIV prevention tool; however, since pregnant women were excluded from early PrEP clinical trials, safety and efficacy data during pregnancy are limited. Given continued high rates of HIV infection for women, some pregnant women are now being provided with PrEP or are involved in PrEP research. Men and women in our study were equally concerned about the health risks of PrEP to the fetus and depended on healthcare provider guidance to understand these risks. Because the demonstration project enrolled couples, an implicit social expectation for many women’s continuation of PrEP during pregnancy was consultation with male partners. Some women reported that consenting to participate was exclusively a woman’s decision; however, many reported that they deferred to their male partner’s opinion and support during the decision-making process. Most male partners believed women should not participate in research studies without their partner’s permission, while a few men believed participation was ultimately a woman’s decision. We suggest that relational autonomy can support a middle ground for informed consent that promotes women’s autonomy while accommodating partner engagement.

Gender Disparities Across the Spectrum of Advanced Cardiac Therapies: Real or Imagined?

Cardiovascular disease has been responsible for more deaths in women than in men each year since 1985. This review discusses federal laws that have influenced the inclusion of women in research and reporting sex-specific differences, then addresses gender differences and gender disparities in four areas of clinical cardiovascular medicine: coronary heart disease, valvular heart disease, electrophysiology, and heart failure. The prevalence of disease in women is highlighted, the clinical characteristics of women at the time of referral for advanced therapies are reviewed, and the clinical outcomes of women are discussed. With the emergence of new technology such as smaller devices and less invasive procedures, more women are being referred for advanced therapies. However, a gap in awareness and diagnosis remains, contributing to later referrals for women. Women who do undergo advanced therapies often have more comorbidities and worse outcomes than men. A call is made to increase awareness, educate healthcare providers, and report more sex-specific data to resolve these gender disparities.

Do These Genes Make Me Look Fat?

No one would argue that men and women differ, not only in features we consider to be related to reproductive function, but also in ways we do not directly connect to reproduction. Although the results of research designed to examine sex differences are always a hot topic of conversation, there are important reasons to understand as much as we can about each sex, from the level of the genome to behavior. There is strong evidence for sex differences in the incidence and presentation of most disease processes (1) in addition to a long-standing knowledge that men and women differ in the most basic metabolic processes, having serious consequences for pharmacological treatments (2). Despite this, there remains an underrepresentation of female subjects in basic research and clinical trials. For example, although the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has had an official policy to increase the inclusion of women in research since 1993, as recently as 2005, only 3% of all NIH grants have been awarded for work that considers that results may differ according to the sex of the research subjects (3). The excuse for this has always been the cyclical nature of female gonadal steroid levels, which potentially impact on sexually dimorphic measures, making the results from females inherently more variable. Nonetheless, the message that “sex matters” is slowly getting through to the research community, as evidenced by funding agencies, such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (http:// www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/25499.html#2.1.2.), mandating that research be performed in both sexes. The study in the current issue of Endocrinology by van Nas et al. (4), in which the authors incorporated the use of powerful molecular techniques (global network and linkage analysis tools) and a solid neuroendocrine approach to understand the role of gonadal hormones and sex chromosomes in sexually dimorphic gene expression, is an excellent example. Sex differences are the result of sexual differentiation, a process that is initiated by the presence/absence of a Y-chromosomeencoded testis-determining factor called SRY in humans (Sry in mice), and then mediated by the presence of Xvs. Y-chromosomes and gonadal steroids (5). The sexual differentiation process, which begins early in development and continues throughout adolescence, results in massive sex differences in phenotype. Most of these differences are the result of natural and/or sexual selection for traits that affect the fitness of each sex differentially (6). Despite the fact that males and females differ so drastically phenotypically, they are almost identical genetically. Thus, the majority of sexually dimorphic traits are the result of sex differences in expression of the same genes. Of relevance, sex-related differences in gene expression have been noted in insects, nematodes, birds, and mammals (6). Mammalian sex differences at the transcriptional level have been known for over 20 yr, with the initial discovery that a number ofcytochromeP450enzyme(Cyp450)genes in rat liverare sexually dimorphic (7). Although not yet documented, it is likely that there are human Cyp450s that are transcribed in a sex-specific manner, thuscontributingtoobserveddifferences inCyp450substrateclearance rates (2). Recently, the application of microarray technologies has allowed for the systematic investigation of sex differences in gene expression in a number of somatic tissues in addition to liver, including kidney, muscle, adipose, whole brain, hypothalamus, myocardium,andheart (reviewed inRef.8).However, themajority of these studies have been hampered by relatively small sample size, resulting in limited power to fully explore tissue specificity in sexually dimorphic gene expression. A previous high-density expression array analysis of 23, 574 transcripts in mice (derived from an intercross between two inbred mouse strains) revealed thousands of genes in liver and adipose tissue showing sexual dimorphism, as well as hundreds in the brain (9). The authors concluded that the extent of sex differences in gene expression is larger than previously realized and that sexually dimorphic genes are highly tissue specific. This report set the stage for the present study by van Nas et al. (4), the goal of which was to investigate sexual dimorphism at the molecular level and explore gene coexpression networks that are preserved between the two sexes or are sex-specific in mice. The authors used a rigorous neuroendocrine experimental design that included intact males and females, gonadectomized (GDX) males and females, administered either placebo, dihydrotestosterone (DHT) or estradiol replacement, and GDX “four core

Inclusion of women in nursing research: 1995-2001.

Although the inclusion of women in research has been examined in medical publications, little is known about how federal mandates have influenced the inclusion of women in research published in nursing journals. This study aimed to examine the inclusion of women in published nursing research from 1995 to 2001, with a focus on the leading causes of mortality. All the articles in each journal were reviewed, and all the research articles that focused on the top 10 causes of death were sampled to measure the inclusion of women, the characteristics of the women included, the funding source, and the topic. Of the 1,149 studies reviewed, 139 met the inclusion criteria, and 117 of these studies included women. Only 15 of the studies reported the age of the women in their samples, and 10 of these included women between the ages of 35 and 64 years. The most frequently reported race was White (n = 21), followed by African American (n = 17), Hispanic (n = 6), and Asian (n = 2). There were no associations among year of publication (p =.62), federal funding (p =.30), and inclusion of women. Among the studies including women, heart disease was the most frequent topic (n = 52), followed by Alzheimer's disease (n = 21), cancer (n = 14), respiratory illness (n = 14), and diabetes (n = 8). Although the majority of the research included women, continuing efforts must be made to include sufficient numbers of women.

Modeling women's health with nonhuman primates and other animals.

Interest in the health problems of women as distinct from those of men is not new (Pinn 2003). The Popular Health Movement of the 1830s and -40s (which targeted health advice to women as the caretakers of their families), the creation of women’s hospitals after the Civil War (which provided a venue for female physicians and nurses to train and practice), and the birth control and maternal and child health movements of the early 1900s all represent major efforts to increase awareness of health concerns specific to women (Weisman 1998). Even so, research investigating diseases and conditions unique to women and evaluating sex differences in the manifestation of common diseases was slow until the very latter part of the 20th century. As late as 1980, for example, the Food and Drug Administration routinely discouraged the inclusion of women in drug trials (Kinney et al. 1981). This exclusionary atmosphere extended also to large clinical trials funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), including the Physicians Health Study (Hennekens and Eberlein 1985) and the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (“MR. FIT” 1982), and is documented in numerous publications (e.g., NIH 1999; Wizemann and Pardue 2000). Change, at least with respect to government policy, began in the mid-1980s with publication of a US Public Health Service Task Force report concluding that women’s health care had been compromised by the failure to conduct research specifically on women’s health issues (USPHS 1985). As a result, the NIH issued a policy encouraging the inclusion of women in research and the assessment of sex differences in research outcomes. However, real transformation of research practices did not begin until an investigation instigated by the Congressional Caucus for Women’s Health revealed poor compliance with the new NIH policy (USGAO 1990). In response to this report and the resulting public and Congressional furor, the NIH established the Office of Research on Women’s Health and initiated a further change in policy that culminated in a new law prescribing the inclusion of women and minorities as subjects in clinical research (PL 103-43 1993). Other NIH actions at this time included the establishment of the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) in 1991. This 15-yr effort encompasses a controlled clinical trial evaluating effects of hormone replacement therapy, a large observational study assessing predictors of disease, and community-based approaches to developing healthful behavior. The WHI is perhaps the most extensive manifestation of a mandate to address common causes of death, disability, and impaired quality of life in postmenopausal women. Recently, the Institute of Medicine released a report (Exploring the Biological Contributions to Human Health: Does Sex Matter?) that provides an historical perspective on women’s health issues, reviews the current state of science in this area, and makes recommendations for future research (Wizemann and Pardue 2001). Notably, the summary statement calls for increased development and utilization of animal models in the study of sex differences in disease. This recommendation emphasizes nonhuman primates, recognizing that these species probably have the greatest potential for advancing such investigations. In light of this document, it is perhaps appropriate that this issue of ILAR Journal is devoted to the use of animal models in the study of women’s health, and, furthermore, that the major focus is on nonhuman primates. It will be seen from the included articles that these animals, especially monkeys of the genus Macaca, have played a pivotal role in extending understanding of both normal reproductive function and pathobiological processes affecting women. Researchers first made systematic use of macaque monkeys to elucidate the reproductive biology of women. Much of this research was organized around study of the menstrual cycle, a phenomenon shared uniquely by women and the Old World anthropoid primates. The first article in the issue (Kaplan and Manuck 2004) provides a brief summary of this work and then describes a phenomenon (functional hypothalamic anovulation syndrome) in which environmental factors (e.g., psychological “stress,” caloric restriction, and exercise) cause women to transition from normal menJay R. Kaplan, Ph.D., is a Professor in the Departments of Pathology (Comparative Medicine) and Anthropology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina.

Health professionals' knowledge of women's health care.

Until 1986, the only issues in women's health which received direct attention were those related to childbearing. At that time the National Institutes of Health made inclusion of women in research a criteria for funding. Since then, the knowledge base to guide disease prevention and treatment of women has grown dramatically. Unfortunately, the incorporation of these data into clinical practice has been much slower. The purpose of this needs assessment was to establish a comprehensive data base on which future programming decisions could be based. Areas of interest identified by health care providers included stress reduction, breast health, prevention of heart disease, and osteoporosis. Other topics that emerged were menopause and reproduction issues, cancer prevention, domestic violence, substance abuse, nutrition, and weight control. These data suggest topics for future programming.