Sex-specific Neonatal Medicine: Do We Teach More Than We Practice?

Sex-based differences in neonatal outcomes have been consistently reported in neonatal literature, with male infants demonstrating higher morbidity and mortality than females at comparable gestational ages. Delayed pulmonary maturation, increased vulnerability to hypoxic–ischemic brain injury, altered immune responses, and higher susceptibility to sepsis contribute to this well-recognized “male disadvantage.” Despite these established biological differences, neonatal intensive care unit practices remain largely sex-neutral. Clinical guidelines, risk prediction tools, and management algorithms rarely incorporate sex as a biologically meaningful variable, resulting in a disconnect between neonatal pathophysiology and bedside care. Treating sex solely as a demographic characteristic rather than a determinant of vulnerability may lead to under-recognition of risk, particularly among male preterm infants. Bridging this gap by integrating sex-aware risk assessment into neonatal care represents a translational opportunity rather than a conceptual innovation. Incorporation of sex-specific considerations into research design, guideline development, and clinical decision-making may support more individualized neonatal care and improve outcomes without increasing resource burden.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Neonatology
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09732179261418410
Primary Topic
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sex-specific Neonatal Medicine: Do We Teach More Than We Practice?

Rakesh Kotha
Journal of Neonatology
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
article

Sex-specific Neonatal Medicine: Do We Teach More Than We Practice?

Rakesh Kotha
article en

Abstract

Sex-based differences in neonatal outcomes have been consistently reported in neonatal literature, with male infants demonstrating higher morbidity and mortality than females at comparable gestational ages. Delayed pulmonary maturation, increased vulnerability to hypoxic–ischemic brain injury, altered immune responses, and higher susceptibility to sepsis contribute to this well-recognized “male disadvantage.” Despite these established biological differences, neonatal intensive care unit practices remain largely sex-neutral. Clinical guidelines, risk prediction tools, and management algorithms rarely incorporate sex as a biologically meaningful variable, resulting in a disconnect between neonatal pathophysiology and bedside care. Treating sex solely as a demographic characteristic rather than a determinant of vulnerability may lead to under-recognition of risk, particularly among male preterm infants. Bridging this gap by integrating sex-aware risk assessment into neonatal care represents a translational opportunity rather than a conceptual innovation. Incorporation of sex-specific considerations into research design, guideline development, and clinical decision-making may support more individualized neonatal care and improve outcomes without increasing resource burden.

Journal of Neonatology
Niloufer Hospital (IN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.