Lack of attention to sex and gender in periodontitis‐related randomized clinical trials: A meta‐research study.

Aim: This meta‐research study aimed to investigate the level of compliance with the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) Guidelines for the inclusion, analysis, and reporting of sex/gender, in periodontitis‐related randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Materials and Methods: Following the inclusion of RCTs related to the treatment of periodontitis published between 2018 and 2019, we applied the SAGER checklist to assess the adherence to sex/gender reporting guidelines. We used non‐parametric descriptive statistics and correlation models to test the association of the dependent outcome with other variables. Results: One hundred and one articles were included in the analysis. The female enrolment ranged between 30% and 94%. Twenty‐six studies enrolled less than 50% of female participants. The overall SAGER score (OSS) of item fulfilment ranged between 0 and 7 items with an average of 1.9 items signifying poor guideline adherence to the SAGER guidelines. These findings were not associated with the corresponding author gender (p =.623), publication year (p =.947), and funding source (p =.133). However, a significant but negative correlation with journal impact factor (r = −0.253, p =.026) was observed. Conclusions: Sex and gender were frequently disregarded in clinical trial reporting. This oversight might limit the understanding of sex/gender differences in periodontitis‐related clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]