Higher risk-less data: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the role of sex and gender in trauma research.

IF 3.1 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Stephanie Haering, L. Schulze, Angelika Geiling, Caroline Meyer, H. Klusmann, Sarah Schumacher, C. Knaevelsrud, S. Engel
{"title":"Higher risk-less data: A systematic review and meta-analysis on the role of sex and gender in trauma research.","authors":"Stephanie Haering, L. Schulze, Angelika Geiling, Caroline Meyer, H. Klusmann, Sarah Schumacher, C. Knaevelsrud, S. Engel","doi":"10.1037/abn0000899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Women and men are at different risk for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is unclear, however, how studies on PTSD risk factors integrate this knowledge into their research. Moreover, the temporal development of women's higher PTSD risk is unknown. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine how prospective studies on PTSD development (k = 47) consider sex and gender across four domains (samples, terminology, analyses, and reporting). Further, we differentially analyze sex/gender differences within five time intervals from 1 month to 5 years posttrauma. PTSD prevalence (OR = 1.72 [1.27-2.34]) and severity (g = 0.31 [0.09, 0.53]) were increased for women relative to men at 1 month posttrauma already, that is, at the first timepoint of a possible PTSD diagnosis. PTSD severity was elevated for women compared to men across all time intervals, but evidence for increased PTSD prevalence for women relative to men was less stable with longer follow-ups. Despite women's higher PTSD burdens, they were clearly underrepresented in samples (68.3% male, 31.7% female participants). Only 5.0% of studies explained or described their understanding of sex and gender, and only 2.6% used sex as discovery variable, that is, investigating sex-dependent risk mechanisms. Sex and gender aspects in design, data, and discussion were considered by only one-third of studies each. Trauma research falls short of its potential to adequately consider sex and gender. Sex- and gender-sensitive practices can advance rigor, innovation, and equity in psychopathology research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).","PeriodicalId":73914,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychopathology and clinical science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000899","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Women and men are at different risk for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). It is unclear, however, how studies on PTSD risk factors integrate this knowledge into their research. Moreover, the temporal development of women's higher PTSD risk is unknown. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we examine how prospective studies on PTSD development (k = 47) consider sex and gender across four domains (samples, terminology, analyses, and reporting). Further, we differentially analyze sex/gender differences within five time intervals from 1 month to 5 years posttrauma. PTSD prevalence (OR = 1.72 [1.27-2.34]) and severity (g = 0.31 [0.09, 0.53]) were increased for women relative to men at 1 month posttrauma already, that is, at the first timepoint of a possible PTSD diagnosis. PTSD severity was elevated for women compared to men across all time intervals, but evidence for increased PTSD prevalence for women relative to men was less stable with longer follow-ups. Despite women's higher PTSD burdens, they were clearly underrepresented in samples (68.3% male, 31.7% female participants). Only 5.0% of studies explained or described their understanding of sex and gender, and only 2.6% used sex as discovery variable, that is, investigating sex-dependent risk mechanisms. Sex and gender aspects in design, data, and discussion were considered by only one-third of studies each. Trauma research falls short of its potential to adequately consider sex and gender. Sex- and gender-sensitive practices can advance rigor, innovation, and equity in psychopathology research. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
高风险无数据:关于性和性别在创伤研究中的作用的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
女性和男性患创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)的风险不同。然而,目前还不清楚有关创伤后应激障碍风险因素的研究如何将这一知识融入其研究中。此外,女性患创伤后应激障碍风险较高的时间发展情况也不清楚。在本系统综述和荟萃分析中,我们考察了有关创伤后应激障碍发展的前瞻性研究(k = 47)如何在四个领域(样本、术语、分析和报告)考虑性别因素。此外,我们还对创伤后 1 个月至 5 年五个时间间隔内的性别差异进行了不同分析。在创伤后 1 个月,即可能被诊断为创伤后应激障碍的第一个时间点,女性的创伤后应激障碍患病率(OR = 1.72 [1.27-2.34])和严重程度(g = 0.31 [0.09,0.53])均高于男性。在所有时间间隔内,女性的创伤后应激障碍严重程度均高于男性,但女性的创伤后应激障碍患病率高于男性的证据在随访时间较长时不太稳定。尽管女性的创伤后应激障碍负担较重,但她们在样本中的比例明显偏低(男性参与者占 68.3%,女性参与者占 31.7%)。只有 5.0% 的研究解释或描述了他们对性和性别的理解,只有 2.6% 的研究将性别作为发现变量,即调查与性别相关的风险机制。只有三分之一的研究考虑了设计、数据和讨论中的性别问题。创伤研究在充分考虑性和性别方面的潜力不足。对性和性别问题有敏感认识的做法可以促进精神病理学研究的严谨性、创新性和公平性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信