Bridging the women’s health gap and the urgent need for change

Make no mistake, women’s health isn’t a niche issue. It concerns the health of half the population. And yet, the gender gap in healthcare remains overlooked.

Women’s health issues have historically been under-researched, marginalised and underserved. This systemic neglect has led to disparities in diagnosis, treatment and overall health outcomes for women.

Addressing these gaps is not just a matter of equality, it is a matter of equity and scientific necessity.

On the face of it, it seems obvious that men and women are biologically different, and yet historically women have been excluded from medical research, leading to the assumption that female health outcomes mirror those of men.

It wasn’t until 1993 that the US Congress passed the NIH Inclusion Policy, requiring women and minorities to be included in clinical research. Even today, although inclusion is mandated, there is no requirement for data to be analysed by sex, meaning that crucial differences in how diseases manifest and respond to treatment in women remain unexamined.

This oversight has serious consequences. Most medications, including everyday drugs such as aspirin, were tested on male physiology, leading to incorrect dosages and a higher risk of adverse reactions for women.

When women aren’t adequately represented in trials, the questions remain today: are these treatments truly safe and effective?

The concept of ‘women’s health’ has long been narrowly defined as reproductive health, focusing on pregnancy, gynaecological care and breast cancer screenings.

While these are important, this limited view ignores the full spectrum of conditions affecting women. To truly advance women’s health, we must also confront the conditions that affect women differently and disproportionately.

These disparities shape the quality, accessibility and effectiveness of the care received. Cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of death for women, can present differently in female patients, often leading to misdiagnosis.

Women experiencing heart attacks are more likely to be dismissed as suffering from anxiety due to implicit biases in the healthcare system.

Similarly, chronic pain, which primarily affects women, is routinely underdiagnosed and undertreated, with women more likely to be prescribed sedatives rather than pain management solutions.

The lack of sex-specific data in medical research leads to a dangerous cycle of misinformation and inadequate care.

In 2020, only one percent of healthcare research and innovation funding was invested in female-specific conditions beyond oncology.

Even in disease-specific research, glaring inequalities persist. Two-thirds of Alzheimer’s Disease patients are women, yet only 12% of NIH funding for research into Alzheimer’s is dedicated to studying its impact on women.

Beyond funding, healthcare prioritisation often leans toward mortality rates rather than quality of life.

Women, who experience a greater burden of chronic illnesses, are frequently left out of research that could improve long-term health outcomes.

The result is a medical system that fails to recognise, research and respond to the specific needs of female patients.

The gender health gap is even wider for women who belong to multiple underserved groups.

Black women, for instance, face greater health disparities than their white counterparts due to both racial and gender biases.

Implicit biases in medicine have perpetuated harmful myths, such as the belief that Black patients have a higher pain tolerance, leading to delayed treatment and inadequate pain management.

Women from lower socioeconomic backgrounds also experience greater barriers to healthcare, making it harder to access early diagnosis and effective treatment.

The medical system has historically failed women, but acknowledging these failures is the first step towards meaningful change.

Women’s health must be recognised as an urgent research priority, with policies and funding that reflect the needs of half the population.

This is not just a women’s issue – it is a public health issue that affects everyone.

If the SNF is inevitable – and politically, it looks likely – the question becomes how to make it work for pharma’s best interests. Three red lines stand out:
The first is a culture of transparency and appeal rights. Decisions must be evidence-based, open to challenge and aligned with NICE. A formulary that simply lists ‘winner drugs’ without rationale will invite litigation and mistrust. without rationale will invite litigation and mistrust.

Secondly, value beyond price must become more than a nice to have. The framework must assess long-term outcomes, adherence and system costs – not just unit price. Otherwise, cheaper short-term drugs will crowd out innovations that actually save money downstream.

Lastly, safeguards for innovation must be built in. A phased approach – starting with new, innovative drugs – could help. Local variation must remain possible for rare diseases, paediatrics and antimicrobial stewardship. Above all, pharma must retain a commercial incentive to launch in the UK.

To address these challenges, we must act collectively:

• Start the conversation. In your organisation, at your workplace or in casual discussions with colleagues. Start talking about women’s health. Break the silence around topics like menopause and endometriosis and help normalise these conversations in both clinical and corporate settings
• •Ask more questions and demand answers. Don’t accept statistics as interesting facts, demand to know what is being done to address it. As scientists and innovators, challenge the status quo and fill the data gaps in female healthcare
• Engage in lifelong learning about women’s health issues and leadership challenges. The more informed we all are, the better equipped we will be to make a positive difference
• Join networks and initiatives. Get involved with organisations and networks that are working to change the landscape for women in healthcare. Support initiatives that focus on research in women’s health, workplace equality and leadership advancement.

Erin Beveridge is Principal Clinical Researcher at Canon Medical Research Europe