The challenges of including sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a qualitative survey
- PMID: 24720875
- PMCID: PMC3990268
- DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-33
The challenges of including sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a qualitative survey
Abstract
Background: Systematic review methodology includes the rigorous collection, selection, and evaluation of data in order to synthesize the best available evidence for health practice, health technology assessments, and health policy. Despite evidence that sex and gender matter to health outcomes, data and analysis related to sex and gender are frequently absent in systematic reviews, raising concerns about the quality and applicability of reviews. Few studies have focused on challenges to implementing sex/gender analysis within systematic reviews.
Methods: A multidisciplinary group of systematic reviewers, methodologists, biomedical and social science researchers, health practitioners, and other health sector professionals completed an open-ended survey prior to a two-day workshop focused on sex/gender, equity, and bias in systematic reviews. Respondents were asked to identify challenging or 'thorny' issues associated with integrating sex and gender in systematic reviews and indicate how they address these in their work. Data were analysed using interpretive description. A summary of the findings was presented and discussed with workshop participants.
Results: Respondents identified conceptual challenges, such as defining sex and gender, methodological challenges in measuring and analysing sex and gender, challenges related to availability of data and data quality, and practical and policy challenges. No respondents discussed how they addressed these challenges, but all proposed ways to address sex/gender analysis in the future.
Conclusions: Respondents identified a wide range of interrelated challenges to implementing sex/gender considerations within systematic reviews. To our knowledge, this paper is the first to identify these challenges from the perspectives of those conducting and using systematic reviews. A framework and methods to integrate sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews are in the early stages of development. A number of priority items and collaborative initiatives to guide systematic reviewers in sex/gender analysis are provided, based on the survey results and subsequent workshop discussions. An emerging 'community of practice' is committed to enhancing the quality and applicability of systematic reviews by integrating considerations of sex/gender into the review process, with the goals of improving health outcomes and ensuring health equity for all persons.
Similar articles
-
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
-
Development and evaluation of 'briefing notes' as a novel knowledge translation tool to aid the implementation of sex/gender analysis in systematic reviews: a pilot study.PLoS One. 2014 Nov 5;9(11):e110786. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110786. eCollection 2014. PLoS One. 2014. PMID: 25372876 Free PMC article.
-
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881. Med J Aust. 2020. PMID: 33314144
-
Impact of social protection on gender equality in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review of reviews.Campbell Syst Rev. 2022 May 25;18(2):e1240. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1240. eCollection 2022 Jun. Campbell Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36913187 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: introduction and general considerations.Pain Physician. 2008 Mar-Apr;11(2):161-86. Pain Physician. 2008. PMID: 18354710 Review.
Cited by
-
Searching for sex- and gender-sensitive tuberculosis research in public health: finding a needle in a haystack.Int J Womens Health. 2016 Dec 15;8:731-742. doi: 10.2147/IJWH.S119757. eCollection 2016. Int J Womens Health. 2016. PMID: 28008287 Free PMC article.
-
Consideration of sex and gender in Cochrane reviews of interventions for preventing healthcare-associated infections: a methodology study.BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Mar 15;19(1):169. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4001-9. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019. PMID: 30876452 Free PMC article.
-
Essential metrics for assessing sex & gender integration in health research proposals involving human participants.PLoS One. 2017 Aug 30;12(8):e0182812. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0182812. eCollection 2017. PLoS One. 2017. PMID: 28854192 Free PMC article.
-
Examples of sex/gender sensitivity in epidemiological research: results of an evaluation of original articles published in JECH 2006-2014.Health Res Policy Syst. 2017 Feb 15;15(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s12961-017-0174-z. Health Res Policy Syst. 2017. PMID: 28202078 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Gender dimension in cardio-pulmonary continuum.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Aug 8;9:916194. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.916194. eCollection 2022. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022. PMID: 36003909 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Higgins JPT, Green S, editor. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2011. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] [ http://www.cochrane-handbook.org]
-
- The Cochrane Library Health Technology Assessment Database. [ http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/o/cochrane/cochrane_clhta_articles_fs.html]
-
- Zief S, Agodini R. Supporting Policy and Program Decisions: Recommendations for Conducting High Quality Systematic Evidence Reviews. [ http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/…/systematic_reviews_ib.pdf]
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources