Sex and Gender Integration in Medical Education Since a 2016 National Survey: How Far have We Come?

The Great Medical Mix-Up: Why "One Size Fits All" Doesn't Fit

Imagine you are a chef trying to cook the perfect meal for a massive banquet. For decades, you've been using a single, giant recipe book that was written entirely by one person, for one specific type of person. You've been cooking this same dish for everyone, assuming that if it tastes good to the first person, it will taste good to everyone else. But recently, scientists have discovered something surprising: the ingredients inside different people's bodies react differently to the same spices. Some people's "engines" (their biology) run hotter or cooler, and their "social environments" (how they live and interact) change how they feel sick or get better. This new field of study is like realizing that a recipe for a spicy curry might need to be tweaked for someone with a sensitive stomach, or that a car engine needs different oil depending on whether it's a truck or a sedan.

In the world of medicine, this is called Sex and Gender-Based Medicine (SGBM). "Sex" is like the hardware of a car—the biological parts like chromosomes and hormones that make a body male, female, or intersex. "Gender" is like the driver's style and the road they drive on—the social roles, behaviors, and identities that shape a person's life. Doctors used to think they could just use the "male" recipe for everyone, but now they know that ignoring these differences can lead to mistakes, like giving the wrong dose of medicine or missing the signs of a heart attack because the symptoms look different. The big question is: Are the future doctors—the medical students—learning this new, crucial way of cooking, or are they still stuck with the old, one-size-fits-all recipe book?

---

The Check-Up: Are Future Doctors Learning the New Rules?

A team of researchers decided to take a fresh look at how medical students in the United States are being taught about these differences. They wanted to see if things had changed since a big survey was done ten years ago, back in 2016. Back then, the researchers found that students were confused; many didn't even know if their schools were teaching them about sex and gender differences, and a lot of them thought "Sex and Gender Medicine" was just another name for "Women's Health."

The researchers sent out a new survey to 371 medical students in 2025, asking them the same big questions: Do you think this stuff matters? Do you know the difference between sex and gender? And most importantly, are you actually learning it in class?

The Good News: Students Get the "Why"
The students are definitely on board with the idea. In fact, almost all of them (96.5%) agreed that knowing about sex and gender differences makes a doctor better at managing patients. They also overwhelmingly agreed (95.7%) that this topic should be part of medical school. It's like a class of future mechanics all agreeing that they need to know how to fix both trucks and sedans, not just one type. They also realized that most medical knowledge in the past was based on data from males, with a huge jump in awareness: in 2016, about 63% of students thought this; by 2025, that number climbed to 88.4%.

The Bad News: The "What" and "How" Are Still Missing
Here is where the plot gets tricky. Even though the students want to learn and know it's important, the actual learning isn't happening as well as hoped.

• Confusion Persists: A small but growing number of students (4.9%) still think that "Sex and Gender-Based Medicine" is exactly the same thing as "Women's Health." It's like thinking a course on "Car Maintenance" is the same as a course on "Fixing Tires." It's not; it's about the whole vehicle, for every driver.
• The Curriculum Gap: When asked if their school had a specific class or program dedicated to this, the answers were shaky. In 2016, about 48% of students said "Yes, we have this." In 2025, that number actually dropped to 39.4%. It seems like the schools are offering less of this specific training now than they were a decade ago.
• Who is Teaching? The students reported that they are mostly the ones starting the conversations about these topics (81.7%), followed by student interest groups. The teachers (faculty) only started about half of the discussions. It's as if the students are the ones trying to teach the class, while the professors are just watching from the back of the room.
• Knowledge vs. Exposure: The students felt they were learning a lot, but when tested on specific facts, the knowledge was spotty. For example, they knew a lot about heart attack symptoms and breast cancer (topics that have been studied for a long time). But when it came to newer, specific facts—like how a common sleep aid (zolpidem) should be dosed differently for women versus men—knowledge was very low. Even though the rules for this drug changed in 2013, by 2025, only a tiny fraction of senior students (6.8%) said they learned about it in school.

The "Not Sure" Factor
One of the most telling findings was how many students were "not sure" if their school even had a curriculum for this. In 2016, about 40% of first-year students were unsure. By 2025, that number jumped to 45.1%. As students moved through their training, fewer were unsure, but a huge chunk still didn't know if this was a formal part of their education. This suggests that even if the topic is being touched on, it's not being clearly labeled or organized. It's like having ingredients scattered on the counter but no recipe card to tell you how to use them.

The Bottom Line
The study suggests that while medical students are eager and understand the value of sex and gender-based medicine, the schools aren't delivering the goods. The "bottom-up" approach—where students have to beg for the classes and start the discussions—isn't working well enough. The researchers found that without a formal, top-down plan from the schools to weave this knowledge into every year of training, students are left with gaps. They might feel confident, but they aren't necessarily competent.

The paper concludes that we can't just wait for new research to slowly trickle into textbooks. The evidence is already there, showing that men, women, and gender-diverse people react differently to diseases and drugs. To fix this, medical schools need to stop treating this as an optional "extra" and start building it into the core of their curriculum, ensuring that every future doctor, regardless of their own background, is ready to treat every patient with the right, personalized recipe.