4.6 Review

Sex bias and omission in neuroscience research is influenced by research model and journal, but not reported NIH funding

期刊

FRONTIERS IN NEUROENDOCRINOLOGY
卷 57, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100835

关键词

Sex bias; Sex omission; Sex reporting; Sex difference; Women's health; Male; Female; Neuroscience

资金

  1. NIH [R01MH109471]
  2. NIH (North Carolina State University Center for Human Health and the Environment) [P30ES025128]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Neuroscience research has historically demonstrated sex bias that favors male over female research subjects, as well as sex omission, which is the lack of reporting sex. Here we analyzed the status of sex bias and omission in neuroscience research published across six different journals in 2017. Regarding sex omission, 16% of articles did not report sex. Regarding sex bias, 52% of neuroscience articles reported using both males and females, albeit only 15% of articles using both males and females reported assessing sex as an experimental variable. Overrepresentation of the sole use of males compared to females persisted (26% versus 5%, respectively). Sex bias and omission differed across research models, but not by reported NIH funding status. Sex omission differed across journals. These findings represent the latest information regarding the complex status of sex in neuroscience research and illustrate the continued need for thoughtful and informed action to enhance scientific discovery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据