Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Research

Sex, drugs and gender roles: mapping the use of sex and gender based analysis in pharmaceutical policy research

Authors: Devon L Greyson, Annelies RE Becu, Steven G Morgan

Published in: International Journal for Equity in Health | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Sex and gender sensitive inquiry is critical in pharmaceutical policy due to the sector's historical connection with women's health issues and due to the confluence of biological, social, political, and economic factors that shape the development, promotion, use, and effects of medicinal treatments. A growing number of research bodies internationally have issued laws, guidance or encouragement to support conducting sex and gender based analysis (SGBA) in all health related research.

Methods

In order to investigate the degree to which attempts to mainstream SGBA have translated into actual research practices in the field of pharmaceutical policy, we employed methods of literature scoping and mapping. A random sample of English-language pharmaceutical policy research articles published in 2008 and indexed in MEDLINE was analysed according to: 1) use of sex and gender related language, 2) application of sex and gender related concepts, and 3) level of SGBA employed.

Results

Two thirds of the articles (67%) in our sample made no mention of sex or gender. Similarly, 69% did not contain any sex or gender related content whatsoever. Of those that did contain some sex or gender content, the majority focused on sex. Only 2 of the 85 pharmaceutical policy articles reviewed for this study were primarily focused on sex or gender issues; both of these were review articles. Eighty-one percent of the articles in our study contained no SGBA, functioning instead at a sex-blind or gender-neutral level, even though the majority of these (86%) were focused on topics with sex or gender aspects.

Conclusions

Despite pharmaceutical policy's long entwinement with issues of sex and gender, and the emergence of international guidelines for the inclusion of SGBA in health research, the community of pharmaceutical policy researchers has not internalized, or "mainstreamed," the practice. Increased application of SGBA is, in most cases, not only appropriate for the topics under investigation, but well within the reach of today's pharmaceutical policy researchers.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Institute of Gender and Health: Gender matters: IGH strategic plan 2009-2012. 2009, Ottawa, ON
2.
Johnson J, Greaves L, Repta R: Better science with sex and gender: a primer for health research. 2007, Vancouver. BC: Women's Health Research Network of BC
3.
4.
Spitzer DL: Gender and sex-based analysis in health research: A guide for CIHR researchers and reviewers. 2007, Ottawa, ON
5.
6.
Boscoe M, Basen G, Alleyne G, Bourrier-Lacroix B, White S: The women's health movement in Canada: looking back and moving forward. Canadian Woman Studies/les cahiers de la femme. 2004, 24 (1): 7-13.
7.
Boston Women's Health Book Collective, Norsigian J: Our Bodies, Ourselves: A New Edition for a New Era. 2005, New York, NY: Simon & Schuster
8.
Ford AR, Saibil D: The push to prescribe: women & Canadian drug policy. 2009, Toronto, ON: Women's Press/Canadian Scholars' Press
9.
Lippman A: The Inclusion of Women in Clinical Trials: Are We Asking the Right Questions?. 2006, Toronto, ON: Women and Health Protection
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
Arksey H, O'Malley L: Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J of Soc Research Methodol. 2005, 8 (1): 19-32. 10.1080/1364557032000119616.CrossRef
15.
Davis K, Drey N, Gould D: What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. Int J Nurs Stud. 2009, 46 (10): 1386-1400. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Anderson S, Allen P, Peckham S, Goodwin N: Asking the right questions: Scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Res Policy Syst. 2008, 6: 7-10.1186/1478-4505-6-7.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
Varcoe C, Hankivsky O, Morrow M: Introduction: Beyond gender matters. Women's health in Canada: critical perspectives on theory and policy. Edited by: Morrow M, Hankivsky O, Varcoe C. 2007, Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 3-30.
19.
20.
Furrow ME: Pharmaceutical patent life-cycle management after KSR v. Teleflex.x. Food Drug Law J. 2008, 63 (1): 275-320.PubMed
21.
Marcee AK: Expanded access to Phase II clinical trials in oncology: a step toward increasing scientific validity and compassion. Food Drug Law J. 2008, 63 (2): 439-457.PubMed
22.
Milewa T: Representation and legitimacy in health policy formulation at a national level: perspectives from a study of health technology eligibility procedures in the United Kingdom. Health Policy. 2008, 85 (3): 356-362. 10.1016/j.healthpol.2007.09.001.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Molyneux DH: Combating the "other diseases" of MDG 6: changing the paradigm to achieve equity and poverty reduction?. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008, 102 (6): 509-519. 10.1016/j.trstmh.2008.02.024.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Ashar BH, Miller RG, Pichard CP, Levine R, Wright SM: Patients' understanding of the regulation of dietary supplements. J Community Health. 2008, 33 (1): 22-30. 10.1007/s10900-007-9063-7.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hartung DM, Carlson MJ, Kraemer DF, Haxby DG, Ketchum KL, Greenlick MR: Impact of a Medicaid copayment policy on prescription drug and health services utilization in a fee-for-service Medicaid population. Med Care. 2008, 46 (6): 565-572. 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181734a77.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Kumar P, Walker JK, Hurt KM, Bennett KM, Grosshans N, Fotis MA: Medication use in the neonatal intensive care unit: current patterns and off-label use of parenteral medications. J Pediatr. 2008, 152 (3): 412-415. 10.1016/j.jpeds.2007.07.050.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Vuorenkoski L, Valta M, Helve O: Effect of legislative changes in drug promotion on medical students: questionnaire survey. Med Educ. 2008, 42 (12): 1172-1177. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03169.x.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Cohen-Kettenis PT, Delemarre-van de Waal HA, Gooren LJ: The treatment of adolescent transsexuals: changing insights. J Sex Med. 2008, 5 (8): 1892-1897. 10.1111/j.1743-6109.2008.00870.x.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Erdman JN, Grenon A, Harrison-Wilson L: Medication abortion in Canada: a right-to-health perspective. Am J Public Health. 2008, 98 (10): 1764-1769. 10.2105/AJPH.2008.134684.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
30.
Lexchin J: Clinical trials in Canada: whose interests are paramount?. Int J Health Serv. 2008, 38 (3): 525-542. 10.2190/HS.38.3.h.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Hankivsky O: Gender-based analysis and health policy: the need to rethink outdated strategies. Edited by: Morrow M, Hankivsky O, Varcoe C. 2007, Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press, 143-168.
32.
Hammarström A: A tool for developing gender research in medicine: Examples from the medical literature on work life. Gender Med. 2007, 4 (Suppl B): S123-S132. 10.1016/S1550-8579(07)80053-2.CrossRef
33.
Johnson SM, Karvonen CA, Phelps CL, Nader S, Sanborn BC: Assessment of analysis by gender in the Cochrane reviews as related to treatment of cardiovascular disease. J Women's Health. 2003, 12 (5): 449-457. 10.1089/154099903766651577.CrossRef
34.
Doull MD, Runnels VE, Tudiver S, Boscoe M: Appraising the evidence: Applying sex- and gender-based analysis (SGBA) to Cochrane systematic reviews on cardiovascular disease. J Women's Health. 2010, 19 (5): 997-1003. 10.1089/jwh.2009.1626.CrossRef
35.
Studdert DM, Brennan TA: No-fault compensation for medical injuries: the prospect for error prevention. JAMA. 2001, 286 (2): 217-10.1001/jama.286.2.217.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Valente TW, Rrogers EM: The Origins and development of the diffusion of innovations paradigm as an example of scientific growth. Sci Commun. 1995, 16 (3): 242-273. 10.1177/1075547095016003002.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Zarin DA, Tse T, Ide NC: Trial Registration at ClinicalTrials.gov between May and October 2005. N Engl J Med. 2005, 353 (26): 2779-2787. 10.1056/NEJMsa053234.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
38.
Morgan S, Cunningham C: The effect of evidence-based drug coverage policies on pharmaceutical R&D: a case study from British Columbia. Healthcare Policy. 2008, 3 (3): 1-25.
39.
Mintzes B, Morgan S, Bassett KL: Medicine by media: did a critical television documentary affect the prescribing of cyproterone-estradiol (Diane-35)?. CMAJ. 2005, 173 (11): 1313-PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
40.
Kennedy J, Morgan S: Cost-related prescription nonadherence in the United States and Canada: a system-level comparison using the 2007 international health policy survey in seven countries. Clin Ther. 2009, 31 (1): 213-219. 10.1016/j.clinthera.2009.01.006.CrossRefPubMed
41.
Briesacher BA, Gurwitz JH, Soumerai SB: Patients at-risk for cost-related medication nonadherence: a review of the literature. J Gen Intern Med. 2007, 22 (6): 864-871. 10.1007/s11606-007-0180-x.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
42.
Hanley GE, Morgan S: Chronic catastrophes: exploring the concentration and sustained nature of ambulatory prescription drug expenditures in the population of British Columbia, Canada. Soc Sci Med. 2009, 68 (5): 919-924. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.12.008.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Sex, drugs and gender roles: mapping the use of sex and gender based analysis in pharmaceutical policy research
Authors
Devon L Greyson
Annelies RE Becu
Steven G Morgan
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1475-9276
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-9-26

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

International Journal for Equity in Health 1/2010 Go to the issue

Research

Inequities in utilization of maternal health interventions in Namibia: implications for progress towards MDG 5 targets

Research

Willingness to pay for rapid diagnostic tests for the diagnosis and treatment of malaria in southeast Nigeria: ex post and ex ante

Research

Controlling for race/ethnicity: a comparison of California commercial health plans CAHPS scores to NCBD benchmarks

Research

Socioeconomic status and self-reported asthma in Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian adults aged 18-64 years: analysis of national survey data

Research

Exploring the promises of intersectionality for advancing women's health research

Research

Health financing reform in Uganda: How equitable is the proposed National Health Insurance scheme?