Sex/gender differences in the human autistic brains: A systematic review of 20 years of neuroimaging research.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mo K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8436080 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundSex differences in brain structure and clinical course of substance use disorders underscores the need to include women in structural brain imaging studies. The NIH has supported the need for research to address sex differences. We evaluated female enrollment in substance abuse structural brain imaging research and the methods used to study sex differences in substance effects.MethodsStructural brain imaging studies published through 2016 (n=230) were evaluated for number of participants by sex and substance use status and methods used to evaluate sex differences. Temporal trends in the numbers of participants by sex and substance use status were analyzed. We evaluated how often sex effects were appropriately analyzed and the proportion of studies that found sex by substance interactions on volumetric measures.ResultsFemale enrollment increased over time, but remained significantly lower than male enrollment (p=0.01), with the greatest bias for alcohol and opiate studies. 79% of studies included both sexes; however, 74% did not evaluate sex effects or used an analytic approach that precluded detection of sex by substance use interactions. 85% of studies that stratified by sex reported different substance effects on brain volumes. Only 33% of studies examining two-way interactions found significant interactions, highlighting that many studies were underpowered to detect interactions.ConclusionsAlthough female participation in substance use studies of brain morphometry has increased, sex disparity persists. Studying adequate numbers of both sexes and employing correct analytic approaches is critical for understanding sex differences in brain morphometric changes in substance abuse.
| S-EPMC5581940 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this systematic review, we highlight the differences between the male and female zebrafish brains to understand their differentiation and their use in studying sex-specific neurological diseases. Male and female brains display subtle differences at the cellular level which may be important in driving sex-specific signaling. Sex differences in the brain have been observed in humans as well as in non-human species. However, the molecular mechanisms of brain sex differentiation remain unclear. The classical model of brain sex differentiation suggests that the steroid hormones derived from the gonads are the primary determinants in establishing male and female neural networks. Recent studies indicate that the developing brain shows sex-specific differences in gene expression prior to gonadal hormone action. Hence, genetic differences may also be responsible for differentiating the brain into male and female types. Understanding the signaling mechanisms involved in brain sex differentiation could help further elucidate the sex-specific incidences of certain neurological diseases. The zebrafish model could be appropriate for enhancing our understanding of brain sex differentiation and the signaling involved in neurological diseases. Zebrafish brains show sex-specific differences at the hormonal level, and recent advances in RNA sequencing have highlighted critical sex-specific differences at the transcript level. The differences are also evident at the cellular and metabolite levels, which could be important in organizing sex-specific neuronal signaling. Furthermore, in addition to having one ortholog for 70% of the human gene, zebrafish also shares brain structural similarities with other higher eukaryotes, including mammals. Hence, deciphering brain sex differentiation in zebrafish will help further enhance the diagnostic and pharmacological intervention of neurological diseases.
| S-EPMC9206309 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aging affects men and women differently; however, the impact of sex and gender on the aging process is not well understood. Moreover, these 2 concepts are often conflated, which further contributes to a lack of clarity on this important issue. In an effort to better understand the relevance of sex and gender in aging research, the Research Centers Collaborative Network sponsored a 1.5-day conference on sex and gender differences in aging that brought together key thought leaders from the 6 National Institute on Aging center programs. The meeting included sessions on comparing males and females, pathophysiological differences, sex/gender in clinical care, and gender and health in the social context. Presenters from a wide array of disciplines identified opportunities for multidisciplinary research to address current gaps in the field and highlighted the need for a more systematic approach to understanding the how and why of sex/gender differences, as well as the health implications of these differences and the sex/gender biases that affect clinical treatment and outcomes. This article summarizes the proceedings of the workshop and provides several recommendations to move the field forward, such as better data collection tools to assess the intersection of sex and gender in epidemiological research; a life course perspective with attention to fetal/developmental origins and key life stages; innovative animal models to distinguish contributions from sex hormones versus sex chromosomes; and integration of sex/gender into teaching and clinical practice. Ultimately, successful implementation of these recommendations will require thoughtful investigations across the translational spectrum and increased collaborations among those with expertise in sex and gender differences.
| S-EPMC9579719 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although sex differences in psychiatric disorders abound, few neuropsychopharmacology (NPP) studies consider sex as a biological variable (SABV). We conducted a scoping review of this literature in humans by systematically searching PubMed to identify peer-reviewed journal articles published before March 2020 that (1) studied FDA-approved medications used to treat psychiatric disorders (or related symptoms) and (2) adequately evaluated sex differences using in vivo neuroimaging methodologies. Of the 251 NPP studies that included both sexes and considered SABV in analyses, 80% used methodologies that eliminated the effect of sex (e.g., by including sex as a covariate to control for its effect). Only 20% (50 studies) adequately evaluated sex differences either by testing for an interaction involving sex or by stratifying analyses by sex. Of these 50 studies, 72% found statistically significant sex differences in at least one outcome. Sex differences in neural and behavioral outcomes were studied more often in drugs indicated for conditions with known sex differences. Likewise, the majority of studies conducted in those drug classes noted sex differences: antidepressants (13 of 16), antipsychotics (10 of 12), sedative-hypnotics (6 of 10), and stimulants (6 of 10). In contrast, only two studies of mood stabilizers evaluated SABV, with one noting a sex difference. By mapping this literature, we bring into sharp relief how few studies adequately evaluate sex differences in NPP studies. Currently, all NIH-funded studies are required to consider SABV. We urge scientific journals, peer reviewers, and regulatory agencies to require researchers to consider SABV in their research. Continuing to ignore SABV in NPP research has ramifications both in terms of rigor and reproducibility of research, potentially leading to costly consequences and unrealized benefits.
| S-EPMC8674314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sex differences in late-life memory decline may be explained by sex differences in dementia risk factors. Episodic memory and dementia risk factors were assessed in young, middle-aged and older adults over 12 years in a population-based sample (N = 7485). For men in midlife and old age, physical, cognitive and social activities were associated with less memory decline, and financial hardship was associated with more. APOE e4 and vascular risk factors were associated with memory decline for women in midlife. Depression, cognitive and physical activity were associated with memory change in older women. Incident midlife hypertension (β = - 0.48, 95% CI - 0.87, - 0.09, p = 0.02) was associated with greater memory decline in women and incident late-life stroke accounted for greater memory decline in men (β = - 0.56, 95% CI - 1.12, - 0.01), p = 0.05). Women have fewer modifiable risk factors than men. Stroke and hypertension explained sex differences in memory decline for men and women respectively.
| S-EPMC8032756 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Though sex/gender is an important social determinant of health, sex/gender inequalities have not been considered comprehensively in environmental health research thus far. The aim of this systematic review was to clarify whether sex/gender theoretical concepts were addressed in studies on the impact of residential green space on self-rated health and whether effect modification by sex/gender was observed. Three electronic databases were searched to identify epidemiological studies on perceived or objective residential green/blue space and self-rated health. Necessary for study inclusion was mentioning at least one keyword for sex/gender in title or abstract, adult study participants and data on self-rated health and on availability and/or use of green/blue spaces. Decisive for study inclusion was consideration of sex/gender differences in the impact of perceived or objective residential green/blue spaces on self-rated health in the analysis and presentation of results. Seven studies were included. They presented an overall positive impact of green space on self-rated health. No consistent sex/gender differences in the impact of green space on self-rated health were found in these studies. However, all studies used a binary operationalization male/female without further theoretical foundation. Research quality could be enhanced by integrating sex/gender-theoretical concepts into study design and interpretation of results.
| S-EPMC6926795 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This research addresses the long-standing debate about the determinants of sex/gender differences. Evolutionary theorists trace many sex/gender differences back to natural selection and sex-specific adaptations. Sociocultural and biosocial theorists, in contrast, emphasize how societal roles and social power contribute to sex/gender differences beyond any biological distinctions. By connecting two empirical advances over the past two decades-6-fold increases in sex/gender difference meta-analyses and in experiments conducted on the psychological effects of power-the current research offers a novel empirical examination of whether power differences play an explanatory role in sex/gender differences. Our analyses assessed whether experimental manipulations of power and sex/gender differences produce similar psychological and behavioral effects. We first identified 59 findings from published experiments on power. We then conducted a P-curve of the experimental power literature and established that it contained evidential value. We next subsumed these effects of power into 11 broad categories and compared them to 102 similar meta-analytic sex/gender differences. We found that high-power individuals and men generally display higher agency, lower communion, more positive self-evaluations, and similar cognitive processes. Overall, 71% (72/102) of the sex/gender differences were consistent with the effects of experimental power differences, whereas only 8% (8/102) were opposite, representing a 9:1 ratio of consistent-to-inconsistent effects. We also tested for discriminant validity by analyzing whether power corresponds more strongly to sex/gender differences than extraversion: although extraversion correlates with power, it has different relationships with sex/gender differences. These results offer novel evidence that many sex/gender differences may be explained, in part, by power differences.
| S-EPMC10898859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Because of the sex-gender differences that are shown in a diversity of physiological and psychological factors, it can be speculated that the clinical presentation of symptoms as well as treatment strategies in women and men with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) may differ. Studies have revealed that IBS is more common in women than men. As for the IBS subtype, IBS with constipation is significantly more prevalent among women than men. Sex hormones and gender differences may play important roles in the pathophysiology of IBS. However, its pathophysiologic mechanisms still remain largely unknown, and therapeutic implications are limited. Moreover, women IBS patients have been reported to feel more fatigue, depression, anxiety, and lower quality of life than men IBS patients. Furthermore, there has been evidence of differences in the appropriate treatment efficacy to IBS in men and women, although relatively few men are enrolled in most relevant clinical trials. A more sex-gender-oriented approach in the medical care setting could improve understanding of heterogeneous patients suffering from IBS. An individualized and multicomponent approach including sex and gender issues might help improve the treatment of IBS.
| S-EPMC6175559 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundDespite growing recognition of the importance of sex and gender considerations in health research, they are rarely integrated into research design and reporting. We sought to assess the integration of sex, as a biological attribute, and gender, as a socially constructed identity, in published reporting guidelines.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of published reporting guidelines listed on the EQUATOR website ( www.equator-nework.org ) from inception until December 2018. We selected all reporting guidelines (original and extensions) listed in the EQUATOR library. We used EndNote Citation Software to build a database of the statements of each guideline identified as a "full bibliographic reference" and retrieved the full texts. Reviewers independently extracted the data on use of sex and gender terms from the checklist/abstract/main text of guidelines. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and narrative synthesis.ResultsA total of 407 reporting guidelines were included; they were published between 1995 and 2018. Of the 407 guidelines, 235 (57.7%) mentioned at least one of the sex- and gender-related words. In the checklist of the reporting guidelines (n = 363), "sex" and "gender" were mentioned in 50 (13.8%) and 40 (11%), respectively. Only one reporting guideline met our criteria (nonbinary, appropriate categorization, and non-interchangeability) for correct use of sex and gender concepts. Trends in the use of "sex" and "gender" in the checklists showed that the use of "sex" only started in 2003, while "gender" has been in use since 1996.ConclusionsWe assessed the integration of sex and gender in reporting guidelines based on the use of sex- and gender-related words. Our findings showed a low use and integration of sex and gender concepts and their incorrect use. Authors of reporting guidelines should reduce this gap for a better use of research knowledge. Trial registration PROSPERO no. CRD42019136491.
| S-EPMC8605583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) celebrates its 20th anniversary in 2022. This review looks back at some of the key developments in stem cell research as well as the evolution of the ISSCR as part of that field. Important discoveries from stem cell research are described, and how the improved understanding of basic stem cell biology translates into new clinical therapies and insights into disease mechanisms is discussed. Finally, the birth and growth of ISSCR into a leading stem cell society and a respected voice for ethics, advocacy, education and policy in stem cell research are described.
| S-EPMC9213821 | biostudies-literature