WTF - #WomenInStroke

[IamAporcupine]

I work in the medical genetics field and I have just found in my inbox an invitation for the following webinar:
"Stroke in cis/trans women: current data on clinical trials, hormonal therapies and stroke prevention"
This is part of 'Women In Stroke' for IWD, ffs.

In parallel there are other brief case report presentations on 'the suboptimal treatment and how diagnosis of acute stroke is often missed in women'

I am speechless.

#WomenInStroke - World Stroke Academy (world-stroke-academy.org)

Thanks for the update.

It think though, it is right to be wary. I think any study into strokes in female patients has to be kept separate because males on oestrogen need their very own studies. It would be bonkers to have them included.

• if recruitment for women in clinical trails is low, could we include transwomen? (by the chair of the webinar 😳)

Dear Heavens. So all the material about CVD, cardiac differences, all to be set aside by purposefully using artificial numbers sooner than resolve the actual issue that needs to be resolved (under-recruitment of a target demographic)?

Unless the chair was acting faux naïf, I have to wonder if people have developed ideology worms.

A trial concerning stroke risk in women would be completely pointless if males of any sort were included. Honestly it is ridiculous.

I couldn't agree more, and I did comment on the 'chat', but the discussion was very brief and superficial.

Oh, there was another (unanswered) question - if transwomen/men were to be included in clinical trials, would this be according to their sex or gender?

there was another (unanswered) question - if transwomen/men were to be included in clinical trials, would this be according to their sex or gender?

The answer is supposed to be "Either and/or both, according to relevance" I would hope (while knowing it isn't common practice). (Let's draw a veil over the number of times I raise this when reviewing something for a journal publication.)

Heidari S, Babor TF, De Castro P, Tort S, Curno M. Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016 May 3;1:2. doi: 10.1186/s41073-016-0007-6. PMID: 29451543; PMCID: PMC5793986.

Reporting sex and gender in medical research - The Lancet

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(19)31041-4/fulltext

I consider including a male in a female study is diluting the results of the female trial. Why would anyone do that when it is so vital that we finally get the issues studied?