Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Front Neuroendocrinol ; 57: 100835, 2020 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32070715

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Investigación Biomédica/estadística & datos numéricos , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , Neurociencias/estadística & datos numéricos , Apoyo a la Investigación como Asunto , Sexismo/estadística & datos numéricos , Animales , Investigación Biomédica/economía , Modelos Animales de Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Publicaciones Seriadas/estadística & datos numéricos , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA