View in EDS

Authors of Clinical Practice Guidelines by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Authors of Clinical Practice Guidelines by Gender, Race, and Ethnicity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Authors: Taneja, Isha (AUTHOR), Jacobs, Jeremy W. (AUTHOR), Kent, Emily M. (AUTHOR), Ambrosio, Fabrisia (AUTHOR), Booth, Garrett S. (AUTHOR), Gilmer, Gabrielle (AUTHOR), Verduzco-Gutierrez, Monica (AUTHOR), Fleming, Talya K. (AUTHOR), Lydston, Melis (AUTHOR), Silver, Julie K. (AUTHOR)
Source: Journal of Women's Health (15409996). Jan2026, Vol. 35 Issue 2, p127-136. 10p.
Subjects: Ethnic groups, Medical protocols, Medical information storage & retrieval systems, Urology, Medical specialties & specialists, Cardiology, Radiotherapy, Pathology, Sex distribution, Rehabilitation, Authorship, Meta-analysis, Descriptive statistics, Sex discrimination, Oncology, Race, Systematic reviews, MEDLINE, Physical medicine, Medical databases, Internal medicine, Neurology, Data analysis software, Confidence intervals, Psychosocial factors, Critical care medicine
Abstract: Importance: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play a critical role in shaping medical care and healthcare policies, yet there is growing concern about the lack of diversity in CPG authorship. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess gender, race, and ethnicity representation among authors of CPGs across different medical specialties. Objective: To evaluate the representation of women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups among authors and contributors of CPGs. Data Sources: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase.com, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 2023. Studies focusing on CPG authorship disparities by gender, race, and ethnicity were selected for review. Study Selection: Eligible studies included those that reported data on gender, racial, and ethnic composition among CPG authors. Out of 2,436 articles screened, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria for full-text review and meta-analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through consensus, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A meta-analysis was then conducted using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups among CPG authors. The meta-analysis estimated pooled proportions of women's authorship across the different medical specialties. Results: The 20 included studies covered a total of 36,783 author positions. Women's authorship varied widely across specialties, with an overall pooled proportion of 25.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 21.8%–30.1%). Racial and ethnic data were available in only a few studies, with significant gaps in reporting. The findings indicate persistent gender disparities in CPG authorship, particularly in specialties such as cardiology and gastroenterology. Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated that substantial disparities in gender, race, and ethnicity remain in CPGs' authorship. More inclusive representation is essential to ensure diverse perspectives in shaping healthcare guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
Copyright of Journal of Women's Health (15409996) is the property of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database: Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection
Description
Abstract:Importance: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) play a critical role in shaping medical care and healthcare policies, yet there is growing concern about the lack of diversity in CPG authorship. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to assess gender, race, and ethnicity representation among authors of CPGs across different medical specialties. Objective: To evaluate the representation of women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups among authors and contributors of CPGs. Data Sources: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases including Ovid MEDLINE, Embase.com, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to September 2023. Studies focusing on CPG authorship disparities by gender, race, and ethnicity were selected for review. Study Selection: Eligible studies included those that reported data on gender, racial, and ethnic composition among CPG authors. Out of 2,436 articles screened, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria for full-text review and meta-analysis. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data extraction was performed independently by two reviewers, with disagreements resolved through consensus, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A meta-analysis was then conducted using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the proportion of women and individuals from minoritized racial and ethnic groups among CPG authors. The meta-analysis estimated pooled proportions of women's authorship across the different medical specialties. Results: The 20 included studies covered a total of 36,783 author positions. Women's authorship varied widely across specialties, with an overall pooled proportion of 25.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 21.8%–30.1%). Racial and ethnic data were available in only a few studies, with significant gaps in reporting. The findings indicate persistent gender disparities in CPG authorship, particularly in specialties such as cardiology and gastroenterology. Conclusions: This analysis demonstrated that substantial disparities in gender, race, and ethnicity remain in CPGs' authorship. More inclusive representation is essential to ensure diverse perspectives in shaping healthcare guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:15409996
DOI:10.1177/15409996251395115