News
Shrinking the gender health gap through innovation in clinical trial AI

By Paula Bellostas Muguerza, Global Lead, Healthcare and Life Sciences at Kearney
The lack of female representation in clinical research is finally getting the recognition it deserves as a driving factor of the gender health gap.
With only 7 per cent of healthcare research focused on conditions that exclusively impact women’s health, it’s an area that has frustratingly been overlooked and underfunded for decades.
Clinicians have been forced to make decisions about women’s health based on limited data and male-centric trials.
As a result, women are routinely subjected to missed diagnoses and delayed treatments.
However, like nearly every sector, AI is reshaping healthcare, and if used correctly, there’s a real opportunity to redesign clinical trials, close long-standing gaps, and make research far more inclusive and effective.
Incorporating AI
Unlocking innovation in women’s health, including more diverse women in clinical trials, disaggregating data by sex, redesigning clinical trials with women in mind, and deepening insights on sex differences were all recognised as core principles for improving healthcare policy in the World Economic Forum’s recent “Prescription for Change” white paper, in collaboration with Kearney and the Gates Foundation.
This focus is critical in improving healthcare outcomes for women.
Conditions such as heavy menstrual bleeding, endometriosis, fibroids, and ovarian cysts cost the UK economy approximately £11 billion per year, but fixing the gaps in treatment and trials goes beyond profit – it’s our moral duty.
And to unlock innovation at scale, policymakers should pair regulatory incentives with financing tools like targeted tax credits and dedicated grant programmes.
However, shrinking the gender health gap will take more than good intentions.
Clinical trials still face a range of issues, from under-reported side effects to low female participation. AI can help by improving how data is captured, making trials more inclusive and leading to fairer, higher-quality outcomes.
According to the National Centre for Biotechnology (NCBI), AI’s ability to analyse complex and diverse information allows for an improved understanding of gender differences, leading to more effective treatments for women in the future.
The World Economic Forum’s push to expand inclusion in clinical trials by involving more women highlights the importance of raising awareness among regulators and trial teams.
Inclusion must be prioritised in the early phases of trials, particularly in cardiology and oncology, and extended to underserved groups, including women of colour and post-menopausal women.
Attitudes to inclusion are also moving in the right direction, and AI can help drive that momentum.
By analysing large datasets, advanced algorithms can identify underrepresented women for targeted recruitment, leading to more representative trials.
AI can also review trial protocols to detect potential gender bias and recommend designs that address gender-based differences and women’s specific health needs.
Approach with caution

Paula Bellostas Muguerza
Although AI offers powerful capabilities, it’s not a fail-safe tool, and the need for human oversight has never been more important.
Models trained on biased data risk repeating existing inequalities, especially when sex-based differences in conditions like heart disease, stroke, and neurological disorders are still underrepresented in many datasets, leading to fatal consequences.
In doing so, AI could reinforce the very misconceptions about women’s health it’s meant to correct.
A study by the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) found evidence that AI tools are more likely to downplay women’s health issues compared to men’s. The increasing use of AI models by local authorities to supplement the workload of social workers across the country could result in widespread unequal care provision, perpetuating the gender bias.
The recommendation for researchers, clinicians, and developers to enhance sex-disaggregated data is especially relevant here.
Without data that clearly captures sex and gender differences, AI systems can’t be expected to recognise or respond to them accurately.
This requires standardised collection methods and consistent terminology so women’s health signals are properly captured and acted upon.
Healthcare organisations process huge amounts of data containing important clinical information, spread out and stored in different formats.
Improving the way data is captured makes clinical trials more inclusive and produces fairer, higher-quality results.
AI can combine structured and unstructured data, turning clinical records into meaningful and actionable insights.
AI regulation also varies wildly across countries.
The EU’s AI Act is one of the first major attempts to introduce clear rules, but elsewhere, regulation remains patchy.
While pharmaceuticals go through rigorous testing and approval processes, AI-driven tools often slip through regulatory gaps.
That’s why it’s even more important to design inclusive clinical trials from the start, ones that properly capture sex and gender differences and feed better data into these systems from the outset.
Mind the gap
Having reached crisis status, the task of reducing the gender healthcare gap can appear overwhelming.
But despite the scale of the challenge, there are real reasons for optimism.
We’re already seeing progress, and growing pressure from researchers, investors, and campaigners is pushing the system in the right direction.
But progress won’t come from technology alone. Transparency and inclusivity are just as important.
AI systems must be developed through processes that involve patients, clinicians, community advocates, as well as data scientists and engineers.
This kind of collaborative participation will help highlight blind spots, challenge assumptions, and build tools that reflect the complexities of healthcare, ultimately dispelling the one-size-fits-all myth.
If AI is going to play a role in closing the gender health gap, it must be guided by more than innovation.
Yes, we’re making technological breakthroughs, but if they simply replicate the inequities of the past, what use are they?
Femtech World Awards
Femtech World Awards 2026: Celebrating initiatives that move women’s health forward

By Wolfgang Hackl, CEO, OncoGenomX Inc., Allschwil, Switzerland
As the FemTech World Awards 2026 winners are revealed, it is a privilege to reflect on the Research Award 2026 sponsored by OncoGenomX Inc., and on the exceptional standard set by this year’s finalists.
On behalf of OncoGenomX Inc., sincere thanks to every applicant and congratulations go to the nominees whose work continues to push women’s health innovation forward.
Research Awards matter because they do more than recognize excellence in a single moment; they help elevate the science, courage, and systems thinking needed to transform women’s health at scale.
This year’s three finalists represented three different but equally important forms of progress. Natural Cycles brought forward one of the largest studies ever conducted on menstrual and ovulatory patterns in perimenopause, analysing nearly one million cycles from more than 197,000 women across over 140 countries.
That project stood out for both its dataset scale and its ability to translate new evidence into a regulated product designed to support women navigating a historically under-researched life stage.
IVI RMA stood out for scientific rigor and clinical precision. Its multicenter, double-blinded, non-selection study on non-mosaic segmental aneuploid embryos offered high-quality evidence on implantation and live birth outcomes, helping move fertility care away from assumption and toward a more evidence-based approach to embryo management and patient counseling.
UN ESCAP’s ‘Femtech in South-East Asia: Unlocking innovation for women’s health’ stood out for a different reason.
Rather than focusing on one product area or one clinical question, it mapped an entire emerging ecosystem.
The report examined the state of femtech across key South-East Asian markets, documented barriers such as financing gaps, stigma, weak ecosystem support, and data challenges, and then translated that research into practical recommendations for governments, investors, founders, and ecosystem builders.
In many ways, all three finalists are winners.
Each project excelled on core evaluation criteria including originality, relevance, coherence, effectiveness, efficiency, impact, and sustainability.
Each also offered something genuinely valuable to the future of women’s health: stronger evidence, clearer decision-making, more informed product development, and greater visibility for unmet needs that have gone too long without sufficient attention.
The final decision was therefore a genuine head-to-head race.
The jury supported its discussion with a numerical scoring approach, but it also looked carefully at systems impact: the extent to which a project not only advances one intervention, but improves the wider conditions under which innovation can emerge, scale, and endure.
That perspective mattered in this category, because the strongest research is not always only the most technically impressive; sometimes it is the research that opens doors for many future innovations to follow.
On that basis, the OncoGenomX Jury selected UN ESCAP as the winner of the Research Award.
The decisive factor was not simply that the report was comprehensive, though it was.
It was that the project helps change the environment around innovation itself.
It provides a practical roadmap for strengthening research, improving data governance, expanding founder support, addressing gender bias in investment, scaling innovative finance, and integrating women’s health more fully into policy and development agendas.
That broader enabling effect is what distinguished the UN ESCAP project. Natural Cycles demonstrated outstanding research translation, and IVI RMA demonstrated exceptional clinical rigor.
UN ESCAP, however, showed how research can influence the structures that determine whether many other femtech solutions will ever be funded, adopted, trusted, and scaled. In that sense, its impact reaches beyond one company, one product, or one clinical pathway, and toward a healthier innovation landscape overall.
Warm congratulations again to all finalists and nominees.
And special congratulations to UN ESCAP on receiving the OncoGenomX Research Award at the Femtech World Awards 2026.
The jury’s decision reflects deep respect for all three projects and a shared belief that women’s health advances fastest when excellent science is paired with the power to reshape the systems around it.
News
WEC Chair calls out Health Minister’s delay on banning BBLs and other harmful cosmetic procedures

WEC chair Sarah Owen has criticised delays over a ban on high harm cosmetic procedures, including liquid BBLs.
The Women and Equalities Committee has published a letter from health minister Karin Smyth after the government missed the 18 April deadline to respond to the committee’s report on cosmetic procedures.
The report, published on 18 February, recommended that high harm procedures such as liquid Brazilian butt lifts, known as BBLs, should be banned immediately without further consultation.
MPs said the government is “not moving quickly enough” in introducing a licensing system for non-surgical cosmetic procedures and “should accelerate regulatory action”.
They also warned that “this lack of timely action is fostering complacency in self-regulation” within the industry.
In her letter, Smyth said the Department of Health and Social Care had “taken the decision to first of all focus on introducing legal safeguards for the cosmetic procedures posing the highest risks and I can confirm that we plan to consult on draft regulations in June”.
The letter added:
“Our intention is to issue a formal government response to the WEC report, once our consultation setting out our proposed approach and underpinning legislation is published.
“I acknowledge the concerns around the government’s pace of delivery in this area but, as you will appreciate, this is a complex area of policy and striking the balance between increased patient safety, placing new requirements on businesses and introducing proportionate and enforceable regulation is challenging.
“I recognise that regulation has not kept pace with the expansion of the aesthetics industry and, on that basis, I can assure you that we are committed to implementing licensing in the current parliament.”
Owen, chair of the Women and Equalities Committee and Labour MP, said:
“Further consultation and delay on clamping down on high harm procedures such as liquid BBLs is unacceptable. It allows unscrupulous people to continue to put women at risk and lets down those who have lost loved ones following these practices or who have come to serious harm themselves.
“As WEC’s report warned back in February, procedures that are deemed high risk such as liquid BBLs and liquid breast augmentations, which have already been shown to pose a serious threat to patient safety, should be banned immediately.
“While it is positive to hear a licensing system for non-surgical cosmetic procedures will be introduced within this Parliament, this issue requires faster regulatory progress, particularly in high harm areas, and the Government is not moving quickly enough.
“The Committee previously heard a powerful and shocking testimony from a woman who developed sepsis after having a liquid BBL. Her experience and those of many others provides clear evidence of the need to tackle this evolving wild west.”
A liquid BBL is a non-surgical procedure intended to alter the shape of the buttocks.
Sepsis is a potentially life-threatening response to infection that can lead to organ damage if not treated quickly.
News
Menopausal hormone therapy could prevent bone loss or lower fracture risk – study

Women who do not use menopausal hormone therapy have a greater risk of developing osteopenia or osteoporosis, conditions that weaken bones and can lead to fractures, disability and loss of independence, new research suggests.
The retrospective cohort study included 387 postmenopausal women who underwent DXA scans between 2021 and 2025. A DXA scan is an imaging test used to measure bone mineral density.
Participants were classed as menopausal hormone therapy users, who made up 33 per cent of the group, or non-users, who made up 67 per cent.
Low bone mineral density was defined as osteopenia, where bones are weaker than normal, or osteoporosis, where bones become more fragile and more likely to break.
Women taking menopausal hormone therapy had about 69 per cent lower risk of low bone mineral density in the spine and hip compared with those not using it.
The association remained after researchers accounted for age, time since menopause, vitamin D levels, smoking and other health conditions.
Diego Espinoza-Peralta, vice president of the Mexican Society of Nutrition and Endocrinology and principal investigator at Investigación Médica Sonora, said: “For years, many women have avoided menopausal hormone therapy because of safety concerns and warning labels.
“This study revisits that narrative and shows that menopausal hormone therapy may have an important added benefit: protecting bone health. That shifts the conversation from ‘avoid if possible’ to ‘reconsider in the right patient.’
“In simple terms: menopausal hormone therapy appears to independently protect bones, not just by coincidence.”
The findings suggest hormone therapy could help some women find relief from menopausal symptoms while preventing bone loss or lowering fracture risk.
Espinoza-Peralta said: “Clinicians may begin to weigh its benefits more carefully, especially in women early after menopause, potentially improving long-term health and quality of life.”
Menopause3 weeks agoPerimenopause misinformation ‘putting women at risk’
Hormonal health4 weeks agoNHS urged to update website following renaming of PCOS
News3 weeks agoWomen still being failed when they reach menopause, experts say
Events3 weeks agoWomen’s Health Innovation Summit opens submissions for 2026 Innovation Showcase
Insight2 weeks agoBritish women among angriest in Europe, health survey reveals
News3 weeks agoThree menopause innovators shortlisted for Femtech World Award
Menopause3 weeks agoSweden eyes domestic production of oestrogen patches amid menopause treatment shortage
News4 weeks agoLow insulin diet and avoiding four food groups may prevent menopause weight gain













