↓ Skip to main content

Integrating and evaluating sex and gender in health research

Overview of attention for article published in Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
82 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Integrating and evaluating sex and gender in health research
Published in
Health Research Policy and Systems, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12961-016-0147-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Day, Robin Mason, Stephanie Lagosky, Paula A. Rochon

Abstract

Both sex (biological factors) and gender (socio-cultural factors) shape health. To produce the best possible health research evidence, it is essential to integrate sex and gender considerations throughout the research process. Despite growing recognition of the importance of these factors, progress towards sex and gender integration as standard practice has been both slow and uneven in health research. In this commentary, we examine the challenges of integrating sex and gender from the research perspective, as well as strategies that can be used by researchers, funders and journal editors to address these challenges. Barriers to the integration of sex and gender in health research include problems with inconsistent terminology, difficulties in applying the concepts of sex and gender, failure to recognise the impact of sex and gender, and challenges with data collection and datasets. We analyse these barriers as strategic points of intervention for improving the integration of sex and gender at all stages of the research process. To assess the relative success of these strategies in any given study, researchers, funders and journal editors would benefit from a tool to evaluate the quality of sex and gender integration in order to establish benchmarks in research excellence. These assessment tools are needed now amidst growing institutional recognition that both sex and gender are necessary elements for advancing the quality and utility of health research evidence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 149 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Student > Master 12 8%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 57 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 14%
Social Sciences 16 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Psychology 6 4%
Other 21 14%
Unknown 67 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 October 2023.
All research outputs
#2,734,975
of 25,651,057 outputs
Outputs from Health Research Policy and Systems
#368
of 1,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,941
of 328,025 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Research Policy and Systems
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,651,057 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,404 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,025 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.