Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Corpus linguistics uses specialist software to identify linguistic patterns in large computerised collections of text - patterns which then must be interpreted and explained by human researchers. This book critically explores how corpus linguistics techniques can help analysis of language and gender by conducting a number of case studies on topics which include: directives in spoken conversations, changes in sexist and non-sexist language use over time, personal adverts, press representation of gay men, and the ways that boys and girls are constructed through language. The book thus covers both gendered usage (e.g. how do males and females use language differently, or not, from each other), and gendered representations (e.g. in what ways are males and females written or spoken about). Additionally, the book shows ways that readers can either explore their own hypotheses, or approach the corpus from a \"nai;ve\" position, letting the data drive their analysis from the outset. The book covers a range of techniques and measures including frequencies, keywords, collocations, dispersion, word sketches, downsizing and triangulation, all in an accessible style\"-- Provided by publisher.

How does contemporary science contribute to our understanding about what it means to be women or men? What are the social implications of scientific claims about differences between \"male\" and \"female\" brains, hormones, and genes? How does culture influence scientific and medical research and its findings about human sexuality, especially so-called normal and deviant desires and behaviors? Gender and the Science of Difference examines how contemporary science shapes and is shaped by gender ideals and images. Prior scholarship has illustrated how past cultures of science were infused with patriarchal norms and values that influenced the kinds of research that was conducted and the interpretation of findings about differences between men and women. This interdisciplinary volume presents empirical inquiries into today's science, including examples of gendered scientific inquiry and medical interventions and research. It analyzes how scientific and medical knowledge produces gender norms through an emphasis on sex differences, and includes both U.S. and non-U.S. cases and examples.

Gender inequality and diversity in STEM is a challenging field of research. Although the relation between the sex/gender of the researcher and the scientific research practices has been previously examined, less interest has been demonstrated towards the relation between sex/gender of the researcher and the way sex/gender as a variable is explored. Here, we examine, from a neurofeminist perspective, both questions: whether sex/gender identity is related to the examination of sex/gender as a variable and whether different approaches towards examining sex/gender are being used in different topics of study within neuroscience. Using the database of submitted posters to the Organization of Human Brain Mapping 2022 annual conference, we identified abstracts examining a sex/gender-related research question. Among these target abstracts , we identified four analytical categories , varying in their degree of content-related complexity: (1) sex/gender as a covariate , (2) sex/gender as a binary variable for the study of sex/gender differences , (3) sex/gender with additional biological information , and (4) sex/gender with additional social information . Statistical comparisons between sex/gender of researcher and the target abstract showed that the proportion of abstracts from Non-binary or Other first authors compared to both Women and Men was lower for all submitted abstracts than for the target abstracts; that more researchers with sex/gender-identity other than man implemented analytical category of sex/gender with additional social information ; and, for instance, that research involving cognitive, affective, and behavioural neuroscience more frequently fit into the sex/gender with additional social information -category. Word cloud analysis confirmed the validity of the four exploratorily identified analytical categories . We conclude by discussing how raising awareness about contemporary neurofeminist approaches, including perspectives from the global south, is critical to neuroscientific and societal progress.

Female physicians often report lower self-confidence in their procedural and clinical competency compared to male physicians. There is limited data regarding self-reported confidence of female versus male trainees and any relation to objective competency in central venous catheter insertion. To analyze differences between male and female trainees in self-confidence and skill-based outcomes in placing central venous catheters. Using data from a central venous catheter simulation training program at a large tertiary medical center, we performed linear regressions to analyze confidence difference pre- and post-training, number of restarts, and number of cannulation attempts while controlling for baseline demographic characteristics of the sample. PGY-1 physician residents in all residency specialties who insert central venous catheters in the clinical setting at a tertiary academic center with a sample size of 281 residents. Confidence difference pre- and post-training measured on a Likert scale 1-5, number of restarts (novel global assessment variable), and number of cannulation attempts during the competency evaluation. Female trainees had both lower pre-program confidence (1.35 versus 1.74 out of 5, p < 0.001) and lower post-program confidence (3.77 versus 4.12 out of 5, p = 0.0021) as compared to male trainees. There was no statistically significant difference in number of restarts (95% CI - 0.073 to 0.368, p = 0.185) or cannulation attempts (95% CI - 0.039 to 0.342, p = 0.117) between sexes in linear regressions controlled for age, specialty designation, prior central venous catheter training, prior ultrasound guided vessel cannulation training, and pre-training confidence level. Female trainees rated their confidence significantly lower than their male counterparts both before and after the training program, despite no significant difference in skill-based outcomes. We discuss potential implications for trainees acquiring procedural skills during residency and for physician educators as they design training programs and delegate procedural opportunities.

Sex and gender play important roles in contributing to disease and health outcomes and represent essential, but often overlooked, measures in biomedical research. The context-specific, multifaceted, and relational nature of gender norms, roles, and relations (i.e., gender dimensions) make their incorporation into biomedical research challenging. Gender scores—measures of gender dimensions—can help researchers incorporate gender into quantitative methodologies. These measures enable researchers to quantify the gendered dimensions of interest using data collected from survey respondents. To highlight the complexities of using gender scores within biomedical research, we used the application of the Bem Sex Role Inventory (BSRI) scale, a commonly used gender score, to explore gender differences in adverse events to the influenza vaccine among older adults (75+). Within this paper, we focus on the findings from our longitudinal gender score data collected over three influenza seasons (2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22), irrespective of adverse event data, to provide commentary on the reliability of gender scores, such as the BSRI, and the complexities of their application. Of the 162 total study participants included within the study, 69 were enrolled in all three consecutive seasons and 35 participants were enrolled in two consecutive seasons. The majority of participants had a different gender score in at least one of the years, demonstrating the nuances and fluidity of gender identity. Interpretations of BSRI data (or other gender score data) when measured against outcome data must, therefore, be time and context specific, as results are unlikely to be replicated across years. Highlights Gender impacts health behaviors and outcomes but can be difficult to capture with a quantitative tool due to its complex nature. Gender scores enable researchers to quantify gendered dimensions (e.g., gender norms, roles, and relations) using data collected from surveys. Due to the fluidity of gender, established gender scores may no longer be appropriate nor effective. Gender scores will, therefore, need to be continuously adapted and/or created to fit the population and time of interest. Biomedical researchers should not shy away from using gender scores within their research. They should carefully consider how gender data is collected, using relevant and appropriate gender scores for their area of interest, and interpreting their results accordingly.

IntroductionThe initiation and translation of sex-sensitive and gender-sensitive research programmes into clinically useful considerations for patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) have been difficult. Clinical frameworks are currently not specific according to sex and gender, despite evidence that these constructs influence the incidence, course and outcome of patients with TBI. The present protocol outlines a strategy for a research programme, supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Institute of Gender and Health, which explores sex and gender topics in the context of TBI, with the goal of building an infrastructure to facilitate the implementation of sex/gender-sensitive research findings into clinical considerations.Methods and analysisA comprehensive multistep research programme is proposed to support three research objectives: (1) documentation of important concepts and ideas for education on topics of sex and gender in the TBI context using a knowledge-user feedback framework, current scientific evidence and the research team’s expertise; (2) development of educational materials for patients with TBI, significant others and clinicians providing care that account for sex/gender and (3) testing the application of these educational materials for feasibility and effectiveness. This programme supports the CIHR Institute’s mission by facilitating partnership with knowledge users across clinical, research, academic and community sectors, through a range of platforms and activities.Ethics and disseminationThe Research Ethics Board of the University Health Network has approved the programme. It is anticipated that this work will add significant value to the advancement of the field of sex, gender and health by serving as a model to foster the integration of these constructs across the spectrum of disorders. This will transform clinical practices and ensure that generated knowledge is translated into improved training programmes, policies and health services that are responsive to the diverse needs of men and women with TBI.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018098697

From climate change to COVID-19 to reproductive justice, there has been deep political polarization around science. Labs of Our Own provides a unique entry point into these twenty-first-century science wars by focusing on our affective relationships to science. The book delves into various sites where scientists, teachers, artists, and activists claim to create more democratic access to science—from DIY biology community labs to feminist classrooms to activist science practitioners. The reader will find that these claims for and attempts at democratic sciences not only impact what counts as science and who counts as a scientist but reconfigure who is included in the proper public. Instead of arguing for a knee-jerk defense of science against right-wing attacks, Labs of Our Own builds the case for a feminist, antiracist, decolonial, queer science tinkering practice that intentionally, politically, and ethically acts to produce new challenges to the definition and boundaries of the human.

The main drivers of gender mainstreaming in basic and clinical research appear to be funding agencies and scientific journals. Some funding agencies have already recognized the importance of their actions for the global development of ideas in science, but further targeted efforts are needed. The challenges for women scientists in fungal research appear to be similar to those in other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines, although the gender gap in mycology publishing appears to be less pronounced; however, women are underrepresented as last (corresponding) authors. Two examples of best practices to bridge the gap have been promoted in the fungal community: “power hour” and a central resource database for women researchers of fungi and oomycetes. A more balanced ratio of women researchers among (plenary) session speakers, (plenary) session chairs, and committee members at the recent fungal genetics conference is an encouraging sign that the gender gap can be closed. The editorial policy of some journals follows the guidance “Sex and Gender Equality in Research,” and other journals should follow, and indicate the gender ratio among authors and reviewers.

When used as variables in biomedical research, sex and gender can be difficult to operationalize and measure. Questions have arisen about whether either category is stable or causally meaningful in a research context. Here, we discuss some of the limitations of using both or even one of these categories in correlational or experimental work. We argue that attempting to draw a distinction between sex and gender can reignite the nature/nurture debate, inadvertently bringing outdated metaphors and assumptions about innateness and causation into our research. Many researchers, including ourselves, have described sex and gender as separate collections of causal factors (which we describe as a “bucket” metaphor) or as entangled (a “knot” metaphor). Because they regard sex and gender as conceptually separable and internally consistent, such metaphors have limited value for understanding the drivers of diversity in our data. Rather than continuing to reify sex and gender as distinct buckets or threads of explanatory variables, we call for deconstruction of these categories by focusing instead on clearly operationalized, instantiating variables that researchers can manipulate or measure. Our proposed approach differs from recent, similar calls in that we are not suggesting the exclusion of a sex/gender category from statistical models; instead, we recommend keeping it—not as a representation of biological reality, but as a tool used under a careful set of assumptions. We provide example datasets to illustrate how a sex/gender category can, when thoughtfully operationalized, be used to improve statistical rigor and inferential precision. In addition, we advocate for attention to variation within sex/gender, which is more informative in investigations of mechanism than comparing means across sex/gender categories. Highlights Recent calls to consider gender, as well as sex, in biological and biomedical research come from an appreciation of the need to acknowledge complexity. Here, we consider the utility of using sex or gender categories to represent that complexity. The concepts of sex and gender, despite originating from very different disciplines and philosophies, are now regarded oppositionally in terms of the nature-nurture dichotomy, a framework that has been rejected in the biological and developmental sciences. Other authors have recently advocated for moving past binary sex and gender categories to instead consider instantiating, measurable variables of interest. We discuss the pros and cons of this approach, and, using sample datasets, present alternatives that can address its shortcomings. We advocate keeping a single, general sex/gender category—not as a representation of biological reality – but instead as a tool used to improve analytical rigor and inferential precision.

Background Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a stress-sensitive disorder that exhibits sex differences in brain–gut–microbiome interactions. Neighborhood disadvantage is a chronic stressor that may influence brain–gut–microbiome health in patients with IBS, potentially contributing to clinical profiles in a sex-specific manner. This study evaluated sex-based associations between neighborhood disadvantage and clinical characteristics, cortical morphology, and Prevotella relative abundance (a sex-specific microbial marker in IBS) in individuals with IBS compared to healthy controls (HCs). Methods Brain magnetic resonance imaging scans were obtained in 182 individuals with IBS (age, 31.0 ± 0.8 years; 128 females) and 161 HCs (age, 32.7 ± 1.0 years; 94 females). Fecal microbiome data was available in 113 IBS participants (80 females) and 127 HCs (74 females). Current neighborhood disadvantage was assessed as the Area Deprivation Index (ADI), with ADI⩾5 defined as high ADI. Group differences in the associations of high ADI with symptoms, Prevotella , and cortical morphology were evaluated using partial least squares. Results Diagnosis Differences: High ADI was associated with greater lateral intraparietal surface area in IBS vs HCs. Sex Differences: There were greater negative associations between high ADI and surface area in frontal operculum and thickness in frontopolar and primary somatosensory regions in females vs males. Diagnosis*Sex Differences: There were greater negative associations between high ADI and surface area in superior parietal and sensorimotor regions in IBS females vs males, and greater negative associations between high ADI and surface area and thickness in dorsolateral prefrontal and parietal regions, respectively, in IBS males vs females. High ADI was associated with greater symptom severity in IBS males, greater perceived stress in both IBS and HC females, and Prevotella relative abundance in IBS females (all p’s < 0.01). Conclusions Neighborhood disadvantage is associated with greater symptom severity in IBS males and both higher perceived stress (exacerbates symptoms) and Prevotella abundance (protective) in IBS females. It generally has a greater negative impact on emotion/pain-related cortical morphology in females vs males. However, there are more prominent somatosensory reductions in IBS females, and prefrontal reductions in IBS males. These findings highlight the interplay between social and biological factors in IBS and underscore the need for targeted, sex-specific interventions. Graphical abstract Plain English summary Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a stress-sensitive disorder that is more common in females than in males and has been linked to changes in the brain–gut microbiome system. Living in a disadvantaged neighborhood is a type of chronic stressor that could contribute to changes in the brain–gut microbiome system and symptoms in IBS. Here, we investigated whether the area deprivation index, a measure of neighborhood disadvantage (based on neighborhood rates of poverty, unemployment, etc.), is associated with differences in symptoms, stress, brain structure, and the level of Prevotella in the gut in males and females with IBS and healthy individuals. Based on our results, neighborhood disadvantage negatively affects the structure of brain regions involved in emotion and pain processing to a greater extent in females than in males; this may contribute to a greater risk of IBS in females, but additional research is needed. Neighborhood disadvantage is associated with additional changes in somatosensory brain regions (involved in pain processing) in females with IBS and cognitive control brain regions (involved in pain modulation) in males with IBS. We also found that high neighborhood disadvantage is associated with worse symptom severity in males with IBS, and with greater stress and Prevotella in females with IBS. As stress is positively associated with symptoms while Prevotella is negatively associated with symptoms in females with IBS, both risk (stress) and protective factors ( Prevotella ) may be present in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Understanding how these factors affect individuals with IBS can aid in improving treatment effectiveness. Highlights Neighborhood disadvantage is associated with increased symptom severity in males with IBS. Neighborhood disadvantage is associated with increased stress and Prevotella relative abundance in females with IBS, which have opposing relationships with symptom severity, suggesting that sex-specific risk (stress) and protective factors ( Prevotella ) exist in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Neighborhood disadvantage negatively affects the morphology of brain regions involved in emotion and pain processing to a greater extent in females than in males. Neighborhood disadvantage shows additional sex-specific associations in IBS, with more prominent somatosensory alterations in females with IBS and cognitive control alterations in males with IBS.