↓ Skip to main content

Gender‐sensitive reporting in medical research

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the International AIDS Society, March 2012
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 (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users
peer_reviews
1 peer review site
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
Gender‐sensitive reporting in medical research
Published in
Journal of the International AIDS Society, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1758-2652-15-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shirin Heidari, Quarraisha Abdool Karim, Judith D Auerbach, Simone E Buitendijk, Pedro Cahn, Mirjam J Curno, Catherine Hankins, Elly Katabira, Susan Kippax, Richard Marlink, Joan Marsh, Ana Marusic, Heidi M Nass, Julio Montaner, Elizabeth Pollitzer, Maria Teresa Ruiz‐Cantero, Lorraine Sherr, Papa Salif Sow, Kathleen Squires, Mark A Wainberg

Abstract

Sex and gender differences influence the health and wellbeing of men and women. Although studies have drawn attention to observed differences between women and men across diseases, remarkably little research has been pursued to systematically investigate these underlying sex differences. Women continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and even in studies in which both men and women participate, systematic analysis of data to identify potential sex-based differences is lacking. Standards for reporting of clinical trials have been established to ensure provision of complete, transparent and critical information. An important step in addressing the gender imbalance would be inclusion of a gender perspective in the next Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline revision. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, as a set of well-recognized and widely used guidelines for authors and biomedical journals, should similarly emphasize the ethical obligation of authors to present data analyzed by gender as a matter of routine. Journal editors are also promoters of ethical research and adequate standards of reporting, and requirements for inclusion of gender analyses should be integrated into editorial policies as a matter of urgency.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Other 5 11%
Professor 5 11%
Researcher 5 11%
Lecturer 4 9%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 10 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Computer Science 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 29 May 2017.
All research outputs
#1,971,423
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the International AIDS Society
#340
of 2,215 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,987
of 168,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the International AIDS Society
#1
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,215 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 168,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.