From means to meaning in the study of sex/gender differences and similarities

Abstract

The incorporation of sex and gender (S/G) related factors is commonly acknowledged as a necessary step to advance towards more personalized diagnoses and treatments for somatic, psychiatric, and neurological diseases. Until now, most attempts to integrate S/G-related factors have been reduced to identifying average differences between females and males in behavioral/ biological variables. The present commentary questions this traditional approach by highlighting three main sets of limitations: 1) Issues stemming from the use of classic parametric methods to compare means; 2) challenges related to the ability of means to accurately represent the data within groups and differences between groups; 3) mean comparisons impose a results’ binarization and a binary theoretical framework that precludes advancing towards precision medicine. Alternative methods free of these limitations are also discussed. We hope these arguments will contribute to reflecting on how research on S/G factors is conducted and could be improved.