More than Cramps in Scrubs: Exploring Dysmenorrhea among Women Healthcare Workers.

Though understudied, dysmenorrhea, a painful cramping sensation occurring near and during menses, is the most prevalent gynecological disorder among women of reproductive age, affecting 50-90% of the global population. Contributing factors of this disorder include poor medical assessment, lack of consciousness, gender bias, moderate to high levels of stress, and depression and anxiety. Among school students and healthcare trainees, dysmenorrhea contributes to short-term absenteeism, lower productivity, creativity, and job performance. Among medical trainees, dysmenorrhea has been found to impact daily activities to a disabling degree in nearly one third of instances, resulting in difficulties in relationships and even self-isolation. Dysmenorrhea further produces substantial global economic losses and higher healthcare costs. To begin to alleviate the extensive issue of dysmenorrhea, we must increase awareness to fully understand its prevalence, risk factors, and potential for effective, affordable, and accessible treatments. Concurrently, our clinical environment must adopt a standard description and assessment tool to prevent, measure, and monitor dysmenorrhea, while on a global scale, we must develop and widely disseminate nationwide labor regulations that address the workforce impact due to the effects of dysmenorrhea.

Precision Immuno-Oncology in NSCLC through Gender Equity Lenses.

Precision immuno-oncology involves the development of personalized cancer treatments that are influenced by the unique nature of an individual's DNA, immune cells, and their tumor's molecular characterization. Biological sex influences immunity; females typically mount stronger innate and adaptive immune responses than males. Though more research is warranted, we continue to observe an enhanced benefit for females with lung cancer when treated with combination chemoimmunotherapy in contrast to the preferred approach of utilizing immunotherapy alone in men. Despite the observed sex differences in response to treatments, women remain underrepresented in oncology clinical trials, largely as a result of gender-biased misconceptions. Such exclusion has resulted in the development of less efficacious treatment guidelines and clinical recommendations and has created a knowledge gap in regard to immunotherapy-related survivorship issues such as fertility. To develop a more precise approach to care and overcome the exclusion of women from clinical trials, flexible trial schedules, multilingual communication strategies, financial, and transportation assistance for participants should be adopted. The impact of intersectionality and other determinants of health that affect the diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes in women must also be considered in order to develop a comprehensive understanding of the unique impact of immunotherapy in all women with lung cancer.

Authorship equity in global health research: who gets the credit at University of California, San Francisco?

Authorship inequity exists in global health research and can be representative of unequal partnerships. Previous studies showed that low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) authors are under-represented in publications from global collaborative research between LMIC and high-income countries (HIC). However, there are little data on trends for how specific HIC institutions are performing concerning equitable authorship. We used Web of Science to find published articles affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), where an LMIC was referred to in the title, abstract or keywords from 2008 to 2021. The country affiliation of each author for all included articles was grouped based on World Bank data. A total of 5805 articles were included. On average, 53.6% (n=3109) of UCSF affiliated articles had at least one low-income country (LIC) or LMIC author; however, this number increased from 43.2% (n=63) in 2008 to 63.3% (n=421) in 2021. Overall, 16.3% (n=948) of UCSF affiliated articles had an LIC or LMIC researcher as the first author, 18.8% (n=1,059) had an LIC or LMIC researcher as second author, and 14.2% (n=820) had an LIC or LMIC researcher as last author. As long as manuscripts produced by UCSF have no LIC or LMIC authors included the university's commitment to authentic equity is undermined. Global health partnerships cannot be equitable without changing authorship trends between HIC and LMIC institutions.