Search

Revising public health policy based on new data does not happen automatically. This is acutely relevant to the now undeniable evidence that many diseases develop differently between the sexes and may also be affected by gender. Current health and medical practices across the globe generally fail to cater for sex and gender effects in common diseases. Inadequate policy frameworks to guide the comprehensive inclusion of sex and gender in research jeopardises scientific rigour and ultimately the practices they underpin. To ensure that Australian health and medical research is fit-for-purpose, we realised that potent initiatives would be necessary to expedite strategic reframing of thought and behaviour. Here we report on our innovative engagement of end-users for democratic self-determined policy reform to guide health and medical research, based on robust data. We draw upon our specific study to outline seven key steps that can be adopted to accelerate effective change, across a breadth of evidence-based initiatives to reform health policies., Competing Interests: SL-N was employed by company Gauge Consulting. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2025 Haupt, Carcel, Halliday, Billiards, Carson, Redman, Lappan-Newton, Aubrey, Bickendorf, Bourke, Buchert, Duarte, Dasvarma, Drake-Brockman, Drysdale, Dymock, Eadie, Eckersley-Maslin, Eissmann, Fazio, Haire, Holder, Kleppe, Knight, Mauclair, Northcott, Oliver, O'Mara, Pang, Philpot, Purves-Tyson, Stewart-Olsen, Ursich, Vukelic, Yakou, Graham, Lamon, Huxley, Thompson, Bennett-Brook, Jenkins, Wainer, Woodward, Chappell and Norton.)