IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/3002456.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Realism and robustness require increased sample size when studying both sexes

Author

Listed:
  • Szymon M Drobniak
  • Malgorzata Lagisz
  • Yefeng Yang
  • Shinichi Nakagawa

Abstract

A recent article claimed that researchers need not increase the overall sample size for a study that includes both sexes. This Formal Comment points out that that study assumed two sexes to have the same variance, and explains why this is a unrealistic assumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Szymon M Drobniak & Malgorzata Lagisz & Yefeng Yang & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2024. "Realism and robustness require increased sample size when studying both sexes," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-6, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3002456
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3002456
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002456
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3002456&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.3002456?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Phillips & Timo N Haschler & Natasha A Karp, 2023. "Statistical simulations show that scientists need not increase overall sample size by default when including both sexes in in vivo studies," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Laura A. B. Wilson & Susanne R. K. Zajitschek & Malgorzata Lagisz & Jeremy Mason & Hamed Haselimashhadi & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2022. "Sex differences in allometry for phenotypic traits in mice indicate that females are not scaled males," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Irving Zucker & Annaliese K. Beery, 2010. "Males still dominate animal studies," Nature, Nature, vol. 465(7299), pages 690-690, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Benjamin Phillips & Timo N Haschler & Natasha A Karp, 2024. "A response to “Realism and robustness require increased sample size when studying both sexes”," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-2, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Laura A. B. Wilson & Susanne R. K. Zajitschek & Malgorzata Lagisz & Jeremy Mason & Hamed Haselimashhadi & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2022. "Sex differences in allometry for phenotypic traits in mice indicate that females are not scaled males," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Natasha A. Karp & Manuel Berdoy & Kelly Gray & Lilian Hunt & Maggy Jennings & Angela Kerton & Matt Leach & Jordi L. Tremoleda & Jon Gledhill & Esther J. Pearl & Nathalie Percie du Sert & Benjamin Phil, 2025. "The Sex Inclusive Research Framework to address sex bias in preclinical research proposals," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-6, December.
    3. Benjamin Phillips & Timo N Haschler & Natasha A Karp, 2024. "A response to “Realism and robustness require increased sample size when studying both sexes”," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 22(4), pages 1-2, April.
    4. Sharman, Zena & Johnson, Joy, 2012. "Towards the inclusion of gender and sex in health research and funding: An institutional perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(11), pages 1812-1816.
    5. Guo Zhao & Yuning Wang & Shuhang Wang & Ning Li, 2024. "Reporting outcome comparisons by sex in oncology clinical trials," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-3, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3002456. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.