- Framework of problems / Objective
- Lack of diversity in review authorship teams
- Lack of sex-related analysis and reporting in Cochrane Reviews: a cross-sectional study
| Ref ID | 840 |
| First Author | A. Antequera |
| Journal | SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2022 |
| URL | https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13643-021-01867-3 |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Author External validity Equity Team Low reporting quality |
| Problem(s) |
Failure to consider equity, different socioeconomic groups or disadvantaged populations Individual study characteristics not reported sufficiently Weaknesses identified in some Cochrane reviews Lack of diversity in review authorship teams |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 516 |
| Summary of Findings | From 516 included Cochrane systematic reviews published during 2018 within the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Sex consideration amongst Cochrane systematic reviews was frequently missing. 56 out of 516 reviews included sex-related reporting in the abstract, 90 considered sex in their design, 380 provided sex-disaggregated descriptive data, 142 reported main outcomes or performed subgroup analyses by sex, and 76 discussed the potential impact of sex or the lack of such on the interpretations of findings. Women represented 53.1 and 42.2% of first and last authorships of Cochrane reviews, respectively. Women authors (in first and last position) was correlated with a higher probability of reporting sex in at least one of the review sections (OR 2.05; CI 95% 1.12–3.75, P=0.020) than having none. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |