MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117517998 · doi:10.1186/s13293-025-00772-x

The effects of sex and gender attributes on clinical outcomes: a systematic review

2025· article· en· W7117517998 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anisa Brar, Anjali Issar, Thaisa Tylinski Sant’Ana, Tatyana Mollayeva

Bibliographic record

VenueBiology of Sex Differences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersAlzheimer's SocietyCanada Research ChairsGlobal Brain Health InstituteUniversity Health NetworkAlzheimer's Association
KeywordsHuman physiologyAlternative medicineBrain researchPublic healthGlobal healthNeurologyMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Biological sex and sociocultural gender may influence changes in health status critical to clinical decision-making, yet scientific evidence of their effects on clinically relevant outcomes remain uncertain. We aimed to systematically review research on sex and gender effects on clinical outcomes and to assess the consistency and significance of associations between sex, gender, and clinical outcomes. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science from each database's inception to November 20, 2023, and included English language peer-reviewed research utilizing standardized measures of sex and gender attributes in adults to measure their association with clinically relevant outcomes. We performed a risk of bias assessment and certainty assessment using criteria set a priori. We created visualizations of results with links to study quality and sex and gender attributes, which facilitated certainty assessment. We reported results across sex and gender-related attributes and measures. RESULTS: Of the 12,964 unique records identified, 19 studies with a total of 643,093 participants (54% male) were included in data synthesis. Four studies measured attributes of sex (testosterone, sex-specific polygenic score), and 15 studies measured attributes of gender (gender identity, roles, and adherence to masculine norms). We observed great heterogeneity in the direction and significance of the associations, resulting in evidence of moderate certainty only for the association between testosterone level and depression, and erectile function. We regarded all other evidence as very low in certainty. CONCLUSION: Research findings regarding the effects of sex and gender attributes on clinical outcomes is variable. However, results suggest that neither sex nor gender attributes should be ignored when investigating clinically relevant outcomes. To enhance certainty, future research should delve into sex and gender attributes concurrently, taking into account that clinical disorders are not evenly distributed across sexes and genders. This approach would provide needed evidence to drive precision medicine and person-centered care. PROSPERO: CRD42023456917. FUNDING: Global Brain Health Institute, Alzheimer's Association, and Alzheimer's Society UK Pilot Award for Global Brain Health Leaders (GBHI ALZ UK-23-971123); Canada Research Chairs Program for Neurological Disorders and Brain Health (CRC-2021-00074).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.286

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.136
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.298 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiology of Sex DifferencesSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207