Sex Representation and User Preferences in Pain Drawing Body Charts in Back Pain Research: Multimethod Study

Background Pain drawing (PD) body charts are widely used in back pain research, but the representation of sex in these charts has not been systematically evaluated. Objective This study aims to evaluate sex representation in PD body charts used in back pain research, assess the perception of a newly designed sex-neutral body chart, and explore user preferences for sex representation in PD body charts. Methods We conducted a multimethod study comprising: (1) a scoping review to assess sex representation and the reporting of sex in PD body charts in back pain literature, (2) an expert opinion study where anatomy experts evaluated the perceived sex of extracted body charts, and (3) a survey among a representative sample of UK adults with and without back pain to assess the perception of a newly designed sex-neutral body chart and explore preferences for sex representation in PD body charts. Results From 349 full-text papers, 108 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most (103/108, 95.4%) did not report the sex of the body charts used, and only 5.6% (6/108) included both male and female charts. Experts showed fair to moderate agreement (Fleiss κ=0.306; Gwet AC1=0.456) in assessing the sex of charts, with most charts assessed as male based on majority ratings (59/108, 54.6%) and classified as male-biased relative to the sex distribution of study participants (76/108, 67.7%). The newly designed sex-neutral body chart was perceived as sex-neutral by 68.5% (204/298) of survey participants across diverse groups. However, perceptions varied by racial group: 73% (181/248) of White participants viewed it as sex-neutral, compared to 42.5% (17/40) of participants from smaller racial groups ( χ ² $_{2}$ =15.9; P =.001). Female participants slightly preferred female charts (85/154, 55.2%); male participants preferred sex-neutral ones (88/144, 61.1%). Nonetheless, most female participants (82/154, 53.3%) and male participants (107/144, 74.3%) considered the option to choose between male, female, and sex-neutral chart versions unimportant. Conclusions Our study reveals reporting gaps and a predominant male bias in the representation of sex in PD body charts used in back pain research. The newly developed sex-neutral body chart was widely perceived as sex-neutral, offering a promising step toward more inclusive pain assessment. However, variations in perception across racial groups highlight the need for cultural considerations in design. These findings underscore the potential of sex-neutral and culturally sensitive body charts to enhance the inclusivity and equity of back pain research and clinical practice.

Publication Details

Journal
Universität Zürich, ZORA
Published
2026-02-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-292600
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 Representation and User Preferences in Pain Drawing Body Charts in Back Pain Research: Multimethod Study

Universität Zürich, ZORA
Sex and Gender in Healthcare
article

Sex Representation and User Preferences in Pain Drawing Body Charts in Back Pain Research: Multimethod Study

article en

Abstract

Background Pain drawing (PD) body charts are widely used in back pain research, but the representation of sex in these charts has not been systematically evaluated. Objective This study aims to evaluate sex representation in PD body charts used in back pain research, assess the perception of a newly designed sex-neutral body chart, and explore user preferences for sex representation in PD body charts. Methods We conducted a multimethod study comprising: (1) a scoping review to assess sex representation and the reporting of sex in PD body charts in back pain literature, (2) an expert opinion study where anatomy experts evaluated the perceived sex of extracted body charts, and (3) a survey among a representative sample of UK adults with and without back pain to assess the perception of a newly designed sex-neutral body chart and explore preferences for sex representation in PD body charts. Results From 349 full-text papers, 108 articles met the inclusion criteria. Most (103/108, 95.4%) did not report the sex of the body charts used, and only 5.6% (6/108) included both male and female charts. Experts showed fair to moderate agreement (Fleiss κ=0.306; Gwet AC1=0.456) in assessing the sex of charts, with most charts assessed as male based on majority ratings (59/108, 54.6%) and classified as male-biased relative to the sex distribution of study participants (76/108, 67.7%). The newly designed sex-neutral body chart was perceived as sex-neutral by 68.5% (204/298) of survey participants across diverse groups. However, perceptions varied by racial group: 73% (181/248) of White participants viewed it as sex-neutral, compared to 42.5% (17/40) of participants from smaller racial groups ( χ ² $_{2}$ =15.9; P =.001). Female participants slightly preferred female charts (85/154, 55.2%); male participants preferred sex-neutral ones (88/144, 61.1%). Nonetheless, most female participants (82/154, 53.3%) and male participants (107/144, 74.3%) considered the option to choose between male, female, and sex-neutral chart versions unimportant. Conclusions Our study reveals reporting gaps and a predominant male bias in the representation of sex in PD body charts used in back pain research. The newly developed sex-neutral body chart was widely perceived as sex-neutral, offering a promising step toward more inclusive pain assessment. However, variations in perception across racial groups highlight the need for cultural considerations in design. These findings underscore the potential of sex-neutral and culturally sensitive body charts to enhance the inclusivity and equity of back pain research and clinical practice.

Universität Zürich, ZORA
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 45%
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.