When it's time for the sex talk, words matter

Abstract

In recent years, the traditional, unspoken assumption in published biomedical research studies that the young, healthy (usually white) male is the "default human" has received increasing scrutiny and criticism. The historical underrepresentation of female participants in biomedical research has been increasingly recognized and addressed, including with the current call for papers at the American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology. Our goal in the present Perspectives is to discuss the topic of terminology (man/woman vs. male/female) for human research participants when considering sex as a biological variable. This important consideration is consistent with the importance of gender identity and related topics to psychological, emotional, and physical health. Just as pronouns are important, so is appropriate terminology when referring to human research volunteers. Despite some disagreement regarding terminology between our two groups of authors, we provide consensus recommendations. Importantly, we all agree that the most vital aspect of the present discussion is the broader focus on sex as a biological variable and appropriate inclusion of biological sex in in vitro, preclinical, and human research studies.

Keywords: female; gender; study design; women.

Figure 1.

Schematic summary of recommendations for describing sex as a biological variable (SABV). Step 1 visually depicts how to determine whether the independent variable of interest represents biological sex and/or gender. Step 2 depicts which nouns or adjectives to use when using SABV in animal, tissue, or cell models vs. human participants. In addition, recommendations are provided on which parameters to collect to adequately address SABV in human participants. Figure icons purchased through https://thenounproject.com/.