Benchmarking sex and gender incorporation into health and medical research, policy and education in Victoria prior to 2026: a mixed-methods study

ObjectiveTo investigate and establish a baseline for sex and gender considerations in policy, research and curricula across the state of Victoria. Design and settingVictoria was selected as a case study for Australia, using a mixed-methods approach to examine health and medical university curricula, research organisation policies and research funding between 2020-2025 prior to mandated inclusion. Main outcome measuresPrimary outcomes include identification of predefined sex- and gender-related terms in university curricula descriptors and funded grant descriptions; and questionnaire responses from university course coordinators and organisational leads. ResultsData mining across nine Victorian universities (318 courses/3383 units) identified [~]93% of units and [~]60% of healthcare courses lacked sex and gender terms in their descriptors. Among medical research organisations operating in Victoria, including peak bodies, research institutes, hospitals and universities, [~]70% (18/26) of the survey responders reported having no sex and gender policy. Rates of sex- and gender-term inclusion in research grants allocated in Victoria (3388) and Australia-wide (8974) validated Victoria as a case study for Australia for National Health and Medical Research Council (9.5%/8.9% respectively), Medical Research Future Funds (11%/10.2%), and Australian Research Council (4.8%/4.1%). One in nine Victorian awards from five government initiatives and one in ten from 12 non-government agencies included sex- and gender-term related terms in their guidelines. ConclusionsThese baseline metrics indicate that sex and gender are still not widely considered in the education and research ecosystems. These findings support the need to build inclusive research policy at a national and state level, and accreditation standards across university education.