Premium
A meta‐analysis of sex inclusiveness within textbooks in the anatomic sciences
Author(s) -
Barry Kelly,
Rae Guenevere
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.2020.34.s1.05876
Subject(s) - clitoris , presentation (obstetrics) , gross anatomy , neuroanatomy , psychology , anatomy , curriculum , comparative anatomy , biology , medicine , obstetrics , pedagogy
Gender and sex minorities have been declared a health disparity by the NIH and discussions pertaining to inclusiveness of LGBTQI+ in medical curricula have soared. This study aimed at analyzing the current presentation of sex, reproductive anatomy and sexual function within gross anatomy, histology, embryology and neuroanatomy textbooks. Content analyses were performed using grounded theory approaches to measure the ideas and concepts presented by the authors about male, female and intersex anatomy, and also male, female and intersex sexual function. The analyses included breadth of topics covered, for example, whether or not the clitoris was included in the female reproduction chapter or whether or not female sexual function was described. Also, inclusive language pertaining to the anatomic variation in sexual anatomy and sexual function was noted as well as the devotion of words spent to each topic within the textbook chapter. In text that presented intersex and anatomic variation topics, a second content analysis was performed to describe the “inclusiveness” of the language used and presentation style when discussing individuals with atypical sex and/or gender anatomy and functioning. Overall, 6 gross anatomy, 9 histology, 5 embryology and 3 neuroanatomy textbooks were analyzed, some in a retrospective fashion to highlight changes in editions. Results indicate that there are inconsistent patterns of addressing sexual anatomy and functioning within textbooks of the anatomic sciences, with different fields (i.e. embryology versus gross anatomy) employing a different subset of approaches.