Written by Jenna Brownrout (BA, Public Health)

To provide women with the quality care they deserve, we must recognize and address the gender gap in health research. From clinical trials to nutritional studies, inclusivity is key to unlocking accurate information and effective treatments. Let's delve into why this matters and how we're working towards a more inclusive future in research.

Why Women's Representation Matters

Women have been significantly underrepresented in clinical and nutritional research studies throughout history. Shockingly, they comprise only 27% of test subjects in over 700 nutritional science-focused clinical trials. This gap limits our understanding of women's health, impacting the development of adequate tailoring of treatments and nutritional guidelines. It's crucial because men and women metabolize drugs differently, respond to treatments uniquely, and have diverse nutritional needs.

A Road to Inclusivity

The journey towards inclusivity in research has been transformative. Policies like the FDA Amendments Act of 2005 and the NIH Revitalization Act of 2010 mandated the inclusion of women and minorities. The FDA's 2019 final guidance emphasized diversity in clinical trials, solidifying a commitment to gender equality. These milestones mark significant progress towards a more equitable research environment.

Call for Action

To achieve gender balance in research, we need a comprehensive strategy. This involves raising awareness among researchers, promoting institutional changes, and educating the medical community about the importance of inclusivity. It's time to champion real change, ensuring women's rightful representation in medical and nutritional research. By prioritizing inclusivity, we pave the way for a healthier, fairer future for all women.

Join the Movement

You can play a vital role in driving meaningful progress. Advocate for inclusivity in research, support policies that prioritize gender equality, and stay informed about ongoing efforts. Together, we can eliminate the gender gap in health research and ensure every woman receives the personalized care she deserves.

Let's act now to improve women's well-being and create a better tomorrow for future generations.

References

1. Liu, K. A., & Mager, N. A. (2016). Women's involvement in clinical trials: Historical perspective and future implications. Pharmacy Practice, 14(1), 708. https://doi.org/10.18549/PharmPract.2016.01.708
2. Melloni, C., Berger, J. S., Wang, T. Y., Gunes, F., Stebbins, A., Pieper, K. S., Dolor, R. J., Douglas, P. S., Mark, D. B., & Newby, L. K. (2010). Representation of women in randomized clinical trials of cardiovascular disease prevention. Circulation. Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 3(2), 135–142. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.868307
3. Beery, A. K., & Zucker, I. (2011). Sex bias in neuroscience and biomedical research. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 35(3), 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.002
4. Geller, S. E., Koch, A., Pellettieri, B., & Carnes, M. (2011). Inclusion analysis and reporting of sex and race/ethnicity in clinical trials: Have we made progress? Journal of Women's Health, 20(3), 315–320. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2010.2469
5. Mazure, C. M., & Jones, D. P. (2015). Twenty years and still counting: Including women as participants and studying sex and gender in biomedical research. BMC Women's Health, 15, 94. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0251-9
6. Regitz-Zagrosek, V. (2012). Sex and gender differences in health. Science & Society Series on Sex and Science. EMBO Reports, 13(7), 596–603. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2012.87
7. Yoon, D. Y., Mansukhani, N. A., Stubbs, V. C., Helenowski, I. B., Woodruff, T. K., & Kibbe, M. R. (2014). Sex bias exists in basic science and translational surgical research. Surgery, 156(3), 508–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2014.07.001
8. Clayton, J. A., & Collins, F. S. (2014). Policy: NIH to balance sex in cell and animal studies. Nature, 509(7500), 282–283. https://doi.org/10.1038/509282a
9. Ventura-Clapier, R., Dworatzek, E., Seeland, U., Kararigas, G., Arnal, J. F., Brunelleschi, S., Carpenter, T. C., Erdmann, J., Franconi, F., Giannetta, E., Glezerman, M., Hofmann, S. M., Junien, C., Katai, M., Kublickiene, K., König, I. R., Majdic, G., Malorni, W., Mieth, C., Miller, V. M., … Regitz-Zagrosek, V. (2017). Sex in basic research: Concepts in the cardiovascular field. Cardiovascular Research, 113(7), 711–724. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvx066
10. Ovseiko, P. V., Greenhalgh, T., Adam, P., Grant, J., Hinrichs-Krapels, S., Graham, K. E., Valentine, P. A., Sued, O., Boukhris, O. F., Al Olaqi, N. M., Al Rahbi, I. S., Dowd, A. M., Bice, S., Heiden, T. L., Fischer, M. D., Dopson, S., Norton, R., Pollitt, A., Wooding, S., Balling, G. V., … Buchan, A. M. (2016). A global call for action to include gender in research impact assessment. Health Research Policy and Systems, 14(1), 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0126-z