Women's health research funding: the gap in numbers

Research money follows priorities. Several analyses suggest women's health has not been one of them. This article collects the best-sourced funding numbers, and says what each one does and does not measure.

Private investment: $1.24 billion vs $44 million

A McKinsey analysis cited by the World Economic Forum found that 11 start-ups working on erectile dysfunction and other men's health concerns raised $1.24 billion from 2019 to 2023. Eight start-ups working on endometriosis raised $44 million.

That counts start-ups, not conditions, and it covers private investment, not public research money. The underlying deal data is not published, so treat it as an attributed consultancy figure.

Public research funding: under 1%

A 2025 World Economic Forum and McKinsey analysis found that six women-specific conditions make up 14% of the total women's health burden but received under 1% of cumulative research funding from 2019 to 2023.

The conditions are premenstrual syndrome, menopause, maternal haemorrhage, maternal hypertensive disorders, cervical cancer and endometriosis. By comparison, diabetes makes up 2% of the burden and received 12.5% of the funding in the same analysis.

The analysis used a public funding database and covers 64 conditions the report selected. It excludes much industry funding.

NIH funding compared with disease burden

One analysis of NIH funding relative to disease burden found that for nearly three-quarters of the diseases that mainly affect one sex (25 of 34), funding favored men. Women's diseases got less than their burden would predict, or men's diseases got more.

In 2019 data, endometriosis was funded at about 18% of the level its burden would predict, chronic fatigue syndrome at about 6% and migraine at about 8%. Some female-dominant diseases were funded above their burden, including breast cancer, Alzheimer's disease and mental illness.

It is a single-author study using 2015 to 2019 budget data and 2015 burden data, so read it as one analysis, not a final answer.

Who takes part in the research

A 2021 analysis of US clinical trials found women under-enrolled relative to disease burden in oncology (43% of participants against 46% of burden), neurology (53% against 56%), immunology and nephrology. Male participants were under-represented in 8 other categories.

A 2026 study found female participation matched or exceeded disease prevalence in 67% of cases, and that therapies for female-predominant indications received 1.5 times more FDA approvals than male-predominant ones.

What this does not tell us

• Funding totals do not show which research was most needed, only where money went.
• Several figures are from consultancy analyses, not peer-reviewed studies.
• We held back a widely quoted "1% outside oncology" figure because we could not read its original source.

Frequently asked questions

Is women's health research underfunded?

Analyses point to a gap. A World Economic Forum and McKinsey review found six women-specific conditions that make up 14% of the burden received under 1% of cumulative research funding from 2019 to 2023.

How much did endometriosis start-ups raise compared with men's health start-ups?

A McKinsey analysis found 8 endometriosis start-ups raised $44 million from 2019 to 2023, while 11 start-ups working on erectile dysfunction and other men's health concerns raised $1.24 billion.

Does NIH funding favor men?

One analysis found funding favored men in nearly three-quarters (25 of 34) of the diseases that mainly affect one sex. It did not show that men get more NIH money overall.

Related reading

• Why women were left out of clinical trials, and what changed
• Do women need different drug doses? What the research says
• Gender gaps in care: from the emergency room to heart procedures
• How women entered medicine, and what doctors are still taught
• The women's health research gap: what the evidence shows
• Why women's health is decades behind: the research gap
• Dosed like a smaller man: why women get the wrong drug doses
• Why medicine is not one-size-fits-all for men and women

Sources

1. World Economic Forum with McKinsey Health Institute, Closing the Women's Health Gap: A $1 Trillion Opportunity (2024), page 23.
2. World Economic Forum with McKinsey Health Institute, Blueprint to Close the Women's Health Gap (2025).
3. Mirin AA. Gender disparity in the funding of diseases by the US National Institutes of Health. Journal of Women's Health, 2021 (PMID 33232627).
4. Steinberg JR et al. Analysis of female enrollment and participant sex by burden of disease in US clinical trials between 2000 and 2020. JAMA Network Open, 2021.
5. Sex representation in trials relative to indication-specific disease burden in FDA-approved drugs, 2015 to 2023. Nature Communications, 2026.

This article is for general education and is not medical advice. Sources were checked in October 2026. Several figures come from secondary analyses, as noted above.