This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Abstract
Background and Objectives Women have been underrepresented in cardiovascular disease clinical trials but there is less certainty over the level of disparity specifically in stroke. We examined the participation of women in trials according to stroke prevalence in the population.
Methods Published randomized controlled trials with ≥100 participants enrolled between 1990 and 2020 were identified from ClinicalTrials.gov. To quantify sex disparities in enrollment, we calculated the participation to prevalence ratio (PPR), defined as the percentage of women participating in a trial vs the prevalence of women in the disease population.
Results There were 281 stroke trials eligible for analyses with a total of 588,887 participants, of whom 37.4% were women. Overall, women were represented at a lower proportion relative to their prevalence in the underlying population (mean PPR 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81–0.87). The greatest differences were observed in trials of intracerebral hemorrhage (PPR 0.73; 95% CI 0.71–0.74), trials with a mean age of participants <70 years (PPR 0.81; 95% CI 0.78–0.84), nonacute interventions (PPR 0.80; 95% CI 0.76–0.84), and rehabilitation trials (PPR 0.77; 95% CI 0.71–0.83). These findings did not significantly change over the period from 1990 to 2020 (p for trend = 0.201).
Discussion Women are disproportionately underrepresented in stroke trials relative to the burden of disease in the population. Clear guidance and effective implementation strategies are required to improve the inclusion of women and thus broader knowledge of the impact of interventions in clinical trials.
Glossary
- CI=
- confidence interval;
- GBD=
- Global Burden of Disease;
- ICH=
- intracerebral hemorrhage;
- PPR=
- participation to prevalence ratio;
- SSWM=
- sample size weighted mean
Footnotes
Go to Neurology.org/N for full disclosures. Funding information and disclosures deemed relevant by the authors, if any, are provided at the end of the article.
↵* These authors contributed equally to this work.
- Received February 14, 2021.
- Accepted in final form August 25, 2021.
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.