Back
Doing Harm (2018, HarperCollins Publishers) No rating

"In this shocking, hard-hitting expose in the tradition of Naomi Klein and Barbara Ehrenreich, the …

Whether or not they're deliberately being misleading, more often than not, researchers still don't do a gender analysis. In the review of federally funded trials mentioned above, 75 percent of the studies did not report any outcomes by gender, and 64 percent did not provide any analysis by racial or ethnic groups. In 2010, a review of 150 recent studies of treatments for depression found that only half the studies analyzed the results by gender. Of over 700 ongoing studies, nearly 90 percent of researchers said they planned to include women, but less than 1 percent said they planned to analyze their results by gender. A 2011 review of 750 studies focused on emergency medicine between 2006 and 2009 found that while the majority reported gender as a variable, less than one-fifth examined health outcomes by gender. Advocates often describe what's happened as the "add women and stir" approach. There was a sense in the nineties that just getting women enrolled in studies would "take care of the problem," explains Dr. Jan Webinski, executive director of the Sex and Gender Women's Health Collaborative. "But it's been twenty-five years and we now have a lot of research that includes women but women are still invisible. Researchers [..]. weren't required to report their research by sex, so women's side effets and responses to medications and diseases were still invisible.

Doing Harm by  (7%)

So there is "inclusion" of a sort, but absolutely no analysis.