Gender-sensitive reporting in medical research

Sex and gender differences influence the health and wellbeing of men and women. Although studies have drawn attention to observed differences between women and men across diseases, remarkably little research has been pursued to systematically investigate these underlying sex differences. Women continue to be underrepresented in clinical trials, and even in studies in which both men and women participate, systematic analysis of data to identify potential sex-based differences is lacking. Standards for reporting of clinical trials have been established to ensure provision of complete, transparent and critical information. An important step in addressing the gender imbalance would be inclusion of a gender perspective in the next Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) guideline revision. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals, as a set of well-recognized and widely used guidelines for authors and biomedical journals, should similarly emphasize the ethical obligation of authors to present data analyzed by gender as a matter of routine. Journal editors are also promoters of ethical research and adequate standards of reporting, and requirements for inclusion of gender analyses should be integrated into editorial policies as a matter of urgency.

A public-professional web-bridge for vaccines and vaccination: User concerns about vaccine safety

Vacunas.org (http://www.vacunas.org), a website founded by the Spanish Association of Vaccinology offers a personalized service called Ask the Expert, which answers any questions posed by the public or health professionals about vaccines and vaccination. The aim of this study was to analyze the factors associated with questions on vaccination safety and determine the characteristics of questioners and the type of question asked during the period 2008–2010. A total of 1341 questions were finally included in the analysis. Of those, 30% were related to vaccine safety. Questions about pregnant women had 5.01 higher odds of asking about safety (95% CI 2.82–8.93) than people not belonging to any risk group. Older questioners (>50 years) were less likely to ask about vaccine safety compared to younger questioners (OR: 0.44, 95% CI 0.25–0.76). Questions made after vaccination or related to influenza (including H1N1) or travel vaccines were also associated with a higher likelihood of asking about vaccine safety. These results identify risk groups (pregnant women), population groups (older people) and some vaccines (travel and influenza vaccines, including H1N1) where greater efforts to provide improved, more-tailored vaccine information in general and on the Internet are required.

Relative Concerns on Visible Consumption: A Source of Economic Distortions

Do relative concerns on visible consumption give rise to economic distortions? We re-examine the question posited by Arrow and Dasgupta (2009) building upon their general framework but recognizing that relative concerns can only apply to visible goods (e.g., cars, clothing, jewelry) and that households consume both visible and non-visible goods. Contrary to Arrow and Dasgupta (2009), the answer to this question turns to be always affirmative: the competitive equilibrium will always be different than the socially optimal one, since individuals do not take into account the negative externality they exert on others through the consumption of the visible good, while the social planner does. If one invokes separability assumptions, then the steady state competitive equilibrium consumption of non-visible goods will be strictly lower than the socially optimal one.

Factors Associated With Women’s Reporting of Intimate Partner Violence in Spain

In Spain, in 2013, the 20% of women who were murdered by their partner had reported him previously. We analyze the 2011 Spanish-Macrosurvey on Gender Violence to identify and analyze the prevalence of and the principal factors associated with reporting a situation of intimate partner violence (IPV) and the main reasons women cite for not filing such reports, or for subsequently deciding to withdraw their complaint. Overall, 72.8% of women exposed to IPV did not report their aggressor. The most frequent reasons for not reporting were not giving importance to the situation (33.9%), and fear and lack of trust in the reporting process (21.3%). The main reasons for withdrawing the complaint were cessation of the violence (20.0%), and fear and threats (18.2%). The probability of reporting increased among women with young children who were abused, prevalence ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]): 2.14 [1.54, 2.98], and those whose mother was abused, prevalence ratio (95% CI): 2.25 [1.42, 3.57]. Always focusing on the need to protect women who report abuse, it is necessary to promote the availability of and access to legal resources especially among women who use them less: women who do not have children and women who do not have previous family exposure to violence.