This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Menopause  • Alert me on articles by topic

Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD,MPH; Margaret A. Winker, MD

JAMA. 2001;285:1508-1509.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In the last JAMA issue on women's health, published October 14, 1992, Clancy and Massion¹ laid out an incomplete patchwork quilt of women's health care and proposed solutions for closing the gaps, including research in primary care for women, women's health curricula, and consideration of a women's health specialty. In an Editorial, Pinn² stated, "By the year 2000, women's health should be an integral part of the scientific mainstream, with gender disparities in research programs relegated to historical interest." That time has arrived, and JAMA has devoted another issue to women's health. What has occurred in the interim? Has the scientific mainstream reached beyond "viewing hormonal differences as barriers to understanding health or treating disease,"² or, indeed, "beyond ‘navel to knees' medicine"?³

The articles in this issue of THE JOURNAL suggest that women's health research has entered the mainstream, dealing with many . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Author Affiliations: Dr DeAngelis is Editor and Dr Winker is Deputy Editor, JAMA.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Sex and Gender Factors in Medical Studies: Implications for Health and Clinical Practice
Pinn
JAMA 2003;289:397-400.
FULL TEXT