BackgroundImportant sex and gender differences have been found in research on diabetes complications and treatment. Reporting on whether and how sex and gender impact research findings is crucial for developing tailored diabetes care strategies. To analyze the extent to which this information is available in current diabetes research, we examined original investigations on diabetes for the integration of sex and gender in study reporting.MethodsWe examined original investigations on diabetes published between January 1 and December 31, 2015, in the top five general medicine journals and top five diabetes-specific journals (by 2015 impact factor). Data were extracted on sex and gender integration across seven article sections: title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and limitations.ResultsWe identified 155 original investigations on diabetes, including 115 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 40 observational studies. Sex and gender were rarely incorporated in article titles, abstracts and introductions. Most methods sections did not describe plans for sex/gender analyses; 47 (30.3%) articles described plans to control for sex/gender in the analysis and 12 (7.7%) described plans to stratify results by sex/gender. While most articles (151, 97.4%) reported the sex/gender of study participants, only 10 (6.5%) of all articles reported all study outcomes separately by sex/gender. Discussion of sex-related issues was incorporated into 21 (13.5%) original investigations; however, just 1 (0.6%) discussed gender-related issues. Comparison by journal type (general medicine vs. diabetes specific) yielded only minor differences from the overall integration results. In contrast, RCTs performed more poorly on multiple sex/gender assessment metrics compared to observational studies.ConclusionsSex and gender are poorly integrated in current diabetes original investigations, suggesting that substantial improvements in sex and gender data reporting are needed to inform the evidence to support sex- and gender-specific diabetes care.

中文翻译：

---

衡量数据差距：将性别和性别报告纳入糖尿病研究

背景在糖尿病并发症和治疗的研究中发现了重要的性别和性别差异。报告性和性别影响研究结果是否以及如何影响研究结果对于制定量身定制的糖尿病护理策略至关重要。为了分析这些信息在当前糖尿病研究中的可用程度，我们检查了有关糖尿病的原始调查，以便在研究报告中整合性别和性别。方法我们检查了 2015 年 1 月 1 日至 12 月 31 日期间发表的关于糖尿病的原始调查，在前五名普通医学期刊和前五名糖尿病特定期刊（按 2015 年影响因子）。在七个文章部分中提取了有关性别和性别整合的数据：标题、摘要、介绍、方法、结果、讨论和限制。结果我们确定了 155 项关于糖尿病的原始调查，包括 115 项随机对照试验 (RCT) 和 40 项观察性研究。性别和性别很少被纳入文章标题、摘要和介绍中。大多数方法部分没有描述性/性别分析计划；47 篇（30.3%）篇文章描述了在分析中控制性别/性别的计划，12 篇（7.7%）篇描述了按性别/性别对结果进行分层的计划。虽然大多数文章（151 篇，97.4%）报告了研究参与者的性别/性别，但所有文章中只有 10 篇（6.5%）按性别/性别分别报告了所有研究结果。对性相关问题的讨论被纳入 21 项（13.5%）原始调查；然而，只有 1 (0.6%) 人讨论了与性别相关的问题。按期刊类型进行的比较（普通医学与普通医学）糖尿病特异性）与整体整合结果仅产生微小差异。相比之下，与观察性研究相比，RCT 在多个性别/性别评估指标上的表现更差。结论性别和性别在当前的糖尿病原始调查中整合得不好，这表明需要对性别和性别数据报告进行实质性改进，以提供支持性别的证据- 和针对特定性别的糖尿病护理。