Considering sex and gender in Epidemiology: a challenge beyond terminology. From conceptual analysis to methodological strategies
Tóm tắt
Epidemiologists need tools to measure effects of gender, a complex concept originating in the social sciences which is not easily operationalized in the discipline. Our aim is to clarify useful concepts, measures, paths, effects, and analytical strategies to explore mechanisms of health difference between men and women. We reviewed concepts to clarify their definitions and limitations for their translation into usable measures in Epidemiology. Then we conducted methodological research using a causal framework to propose methodologically appropriate strategies for measuring sex and gender effects in health. (1) Concepts and measures. We define gender as a set of norms prescribed to individuals according to their attributed-at-birth sex. Gender pressure creates a systemic gap, at population level, in behaviors, activities, experiences, etc., between men and women. A pragmatic individual measure of gender would correspond to the level at which an individual complies with a set of elements constituting femininity or masculinity in a given population, place and time. (2) Main analytical strategy. Defining and measuring gender are not sufficient to distinguish the effects of sex and gender on a health outcome. We should also think in terms of mechanisms, i.e., how the variables are linked together, to define appropriate analytical strategies. A causal framework can help us to conceptualize “sex” as a “parent” of a gender or gendered variable. This implies that we cannot interpret sex effects as sexed mechanisms, and that we can explore gendered mechanisms of sex-differences by mediation analyses. (3) Alternative strategy. Gender could also be directly examined as a mechanism, rather than through a variable representing its realization in the individual, by approaching it as an interaction between sex and social environment. Both analytical strategies have limitations relative to the impossibility of reducing a complex concept to a single or a few measures, and of capturing the entire effect of the phenomenon of gender. However, these strategies could lead to more accurate analyses of the mechanisms underlying health differences between men and women.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Hammarström A, Johansson K, Annandale E, Ahlgren C, Aléx L, Christianson M, Elwér S, et al. Central gender theoretical concepts in health research: the state of the art. J Epidemiol Commun Health. 2014;68(2):185–90. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2013-202572.
Johnson JL, Greaves L, Repta R. Better science with sex and gender: facilitating the use of a sex and gender-based analysis in health research. Int J Equity Health. 2009;8:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-9276-8-14.
King BM. Point: a call for proper usage of “gender” and “sex” in biomedical publications. Am J Physiol Regulat Integr Compar Physiol. 2010;298(6):R1700-1701. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00694.2009.
Nowatzki N, Grant KR. Sex is not enough: the need for gender-based analysis in health research. Health Care Women Int. 2011;32(4):263–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2010.519838.
Tadiri CP, Raparelli V, Abrahamowicz M, Kautzy-Willer A, Kublickiene K, Herrero MT, Norris CM, Pilote L. Methods for prospectively incorporating gender into health sciences research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021;129:191–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.08.018.
Doyal L. Sex, Gender, and Health: The Need for a New Approach. BMJ. 2001;323(7320):1061–3. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.323.7320.1061.
Greaves L. Why put gender and sex into health research? In: Designing and conducting gender, sex, & health research. SAGE Publications, Inc: Thousand Oaks; 2012, 3‑14. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230610.
Oertelt-Prigione S, Parol R, Krohn S, Preißner R, Regitz-Zagrosek V. Analysis of sex and gender-specific research reveals a common increase in publications and marked differences between disciplines. BMC Med. 2010;8(1):70. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-8-70.
Hammarström A, Annandale E. A conceptual muddle: an empirical analysis of the use of ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ in ‘gender-specific medicine’ journals. PLoS ONE. 2012;7(4): e34193. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0034193.
Krieger N. Genders, sexes, and health: what are the connections–and why does it matter? Int J Epidemiol. 2003;32(4):652–7.
Madsen TE, Bourjeily G, Hasnain M, Jenkins M, Morrison MF, Sandberg K, Tong IL, Trott J, Werbinski JL, McGregor AJ. Sex- and gender-based medicine: the need for precise terminology. Gender Genome. 2017;1(3):122–8. https://doi.org/10.1089/gg.2017.0005.
Ristvedt SL. The evolution of gender. JAMA Psychiat. 2014;71(1):13–4. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2013.3199.
Oakley A. Sex, gender and society. London: Temple Smith; 1972.
Fausto-Sterling A. The five sexes. Sciences. 1993;33(2):20–4. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2326-1951.1993.tb03081.x.
Laqueur T. La Fabrique du sexe: Essai sur le corps et le genre en Occident. Paris: Gallimard; 1992.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Consulté le. https://www.cihr-irsc-igh-isfh.ca/. Accessed 1 mars 2022.
Kelly-Irving M, et Cyrille Delpierre. The embodiment dynamic over the life course: a case for examining cancer aetiology. In: The Palgrave Handbook of Biology and Society, édité par Maurizio Meloni, John Cromby, Des Fitzgerald, et Stephanie Lloyd. Palgrave Macmillan: UK, 2018; 519‑40. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52879-7_22.
Kelly-Irving M, Delpierre C. Framework for understanding health inequalities over the life course: the embodiment dynamic and biological mechanisms of exogenous and endogenous origin. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2021;75(12):1181–6. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2021-216430.
Delphy C. L’ennemi principal. Tome 1: Économie politique du patriarcat. Paris, Syllepse, 1998.
Durkheim É. Les règles de la méthode sociologique. Bibliothèque de philosophie contemporaine. Germer Baillière; 1895
Bem SL. The measurement of psychological androgyny. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1974;42:155–62.
Mahalik JR, Locke BD, Ludlow LH, Diemer MA, Scott RPJ, Gottfried M, Freitas G. Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychol Men Masculinity. 2003;4:3–25.
Lippa RA, Martin LR, Friedman HS. Gender-related individual differences and mortality in the terman longitudinal study: is masculinity hazardous to your health? Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2000;26(12):1560–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672002612010.
Pelletier R, Ditto B, Pilote L. A composite measure of gender and its association with risk factors in patients with premature acute coronary syndrome. Psychosom Med. 2015;77(5):517–26. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000186.
Smith PM, Koehoorn M. Measuring gender when you don’t have a gender measure: constructing a gender index using survey data. Int J Equity Health. 2016;15(1):82. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-016-0370-4.
Pearl J. Causality. Models, reasoning, and inference. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2009.
Tennant PW, Murray EJ, Arnold KF, Berrie L, Fox MP, Gadd SC, Harrison WJ, et al. Use of directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) to identify confounders in applied health research: review and recommendations. Int J Epidemiol. 2021;50:620–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyaa213.
VanderWeele TJ. Explanation in causal inference. Methods for mediation and interaction. New York: Oxford University Press; 2015.
VanderWeele TJ. Mediation analysis: a practitioner’s guide. Annu Rev Public Health. 2016;37(17):32.
Mead, Margaret. 1963. Moeurs et sexualité en Océanie. Plon.
VanderWeele TJ, Knol MJ. A tutorial on interaction. Epidemiol Methods. 2014;3:33–72. https://doi.org/10.1515/em-2013-0005.