Equity, diversity, inclusion, sex and gender

When we talk about sex, we are generally referring to biological sex, defined by physiological characteristics such as chromosomes, hormones, gene expression and the reproductive system. This generally corresponds to the sex assigned at birth, which can be found on official documents. However, some people are born with physical characteristics that do not fit a binary definition of sex (female or male) or have variations in their sexual development, particularly at puberty. These individuals, who are referred to as intersex or developmentally disabled, are generally assigned a binary sex at birth, particularly in countries or regions that do not allow for the assignment of a non-binary sex at birth (Canada is one such country). In research, sex assigned at birth is most often included, as it is easier to measure because of its binary quality.

Gender is a socio-cultural construct that is composed of several dimensions, such as gender identity, gender relations, gender roles, institutionalized gender, etc. It may or may not correspond to the sex (assigned at birth or biologically) of the individual. It may or may not correspond to the sex (assigned at birth or biological) of the individual. Gender is beginning to be measured more frequently in studies, but the diversity of methods used and the evolution of definitions make its interpretation difficult. It is essential to move away from stereotypical characteristics associated with binary genders (femininity and masculinity) in order to measure the experience and perception of individuals without tainting the results with spatial and temporal bias.

A growing corpus of literature that has evaluated both concepts highlights the fact that gender is as relevant or more relevant to measure in research than sex assigned at birth (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2022). The fact that we rarely have access to the true biological sex of study participants makes the use of sex assigned at birth common practice. This may not be representative of participants’ biological sex, which is still medically sensitive, or of their life experience. Measuring gender allows for the identification of patterns that are not present when measuring sex at birth alone and provides a deeper, more realistic dimension to the results. A joint measurement of sex and gender is therefore ideal.

Two tools are proposed by our team: one corresponds to a self-reported measure of perceived gender to be integrated before data collection, while the other corresponds to a method for creating a composite gender index after data collection when only sex assigned at birth has been measured. The proposed tools are presented in two different papers: