Search for: All records

Abstract In this study, we quantified differences in iris stiffness between female and male subjects in healthy and postlaser peripheral iridotomy (post-LPI) groups using an image-based inverse modeling approach. We analyzed anterior segment optical coherence tomography (AS-OCT) images from 25 participants across four groups. Finite element models were created using **solidworks, **abaqus, and a custom C program, modeling the iris as a neo-Hookean material. We found that post-LPI females had significantly higher normalized elastic modulus (E′=3.81±1.74) than healthy females (E′=0.92±0.31,p=0.004), while no significant difference was observed in males. Post-LPI females also showed significantly higher stiffness than post-LPI males (p=0.003). Here, p denotes the probability value, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant. Our findings suggest that sex-based differences in iris biomechanics may contribute to the higher susceptibility of females to primary angle-closure disease. Despite the small sample size, this preliminary study highlights the need for larger, sex-stratified investigations into glaucoma pathophysiology. 

Abstract The biased use of male subjects in biomedical research has created limitations, underscoring the importance of including women to enhance the outcomes of evidence-based medicine and to promote human health. While federal policies (e.g., the 1993 Revitalization Act and the 2016 Sex as a Biological Variable Act) have aimed to improve sex balance in studies funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), data on sex inclusivity in non-NIH funded research remain limited. The objective of this study was to analyze the trend of sex inclusion in abstracts submitted to the Summer Biomechanics, Bioengineering, & Biotransport Conference (SB3C) over 7 years. We scored every abstract accepted to SB3C, and the findings revealed that approximately 20% of total abstracts included sex-related information, and this trend remained stable. Surprisingly, there was no significant increase in abstracts, including both sexes and those with balanced female and male samples. The proportion of abstracts with balanced sexes was notably lower than those including both sexes. Additionally, we examined whether the exclusion of one sex from the corresponding studies was justified by the research questions. Female-only studies had a 50% justification rate, while male-only studies had only 2% justification. Disparity in sex inclusion in SB3C abstracts was apparent, prompting us to encourage scientists to be more mindful of the sex of the research samples. Addressing sex inclusivity in biomechanics and mechanobiology research is essential for advancing medical knowledge and for promoting better healthcare outcomes for everyone.