Evidence often falls short in neuroscience reports of sex-dependent effects, analysis finds
Studies in the behavioral and brain sciences reporting a major sex-dependent effect—that a drug, treatment or other intervention is more effective in one sex than another—are supported by appropriate evidence less than 25% of the time, an analysis finds.
A recent analysis of 200 neuroscience and behavioral science articles claims that only 24% of those reporting sex-dependent effects provide appropriate statistical evidence to support their claims. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published the study, which examined studies across six brain-related research areas, with psychology and neuroscience showing the lowest rates of appropriate evidence at 39% and 18%, respectively.
Donna Maney, a professor of psychology at Emory University, notes that the high number of reports in neuroscience may be due to bias, as neuroscientists may be more focused on finding sex differences than other scientists. However, the brain is one of the least sexually differentiated organs, and Maney's team was particularly concerned by the number of recommendations for sex-specific clinical approaches that lacked proper statistical comparisons.
Maney emphasizes that researchers should not treat sex as the most important variable and should instead focus on other factors that may explain variation in treatment effects, such as age or weight. The new tool, available at sexdifference.org, aims to help researchers verify sex-specific effects through proper statistical comparisons.
Written by urgent.news from Medical Xpress's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
