ReviewAging clinical and experimental research2008
Men: good health and high mortality. Sex differences in health and aging.
Review in Aging clinical and experimental research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 305 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
305 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of high intensity interval training (HIIT) on cardiopulmonary fitness and physical function in middle-aged and elderly women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Pooled it
- Gender differences of health literacy in persons with a migration background: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Prevalence of protein intake below recommended in community-dwelling older adults: a meta-analysis across cohorts from the PROMISS consortium.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2020Pooled it
- Pro-longevity compounds extend Caenorhabditis elegans male lifespan and reproductive healthspan.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Your brain doesn't look a day past 70! Cross-sectional associations with brain-predicted age in the cognitively-intact oldest-old.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular health, as per life's essential 8, and unhealthy aging trajectories.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Sex differences in disease burden in China from 1990 to 2023 triangulating GBD and CHARLS.iScience · 2026Article
- Estimates for sensory impairments requiring rehabilitation in China and globally: a comparative analysis of trends from 1990 to 2021 and future projections based on the GBD-WHO rehabilitation database 2021.Journal of global health · 2026Article
- Cognitive trajectories and mortality risk in older adults: a 9-year follow-up study.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Trends in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Mortality by Race, Age, and Gender in the United States Between 1999 and 2020.Cureus · 2026Article
- Article
- Is morbidity compressing or expanding? Cross-national trends in midlife multimorbidity across cohorts.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Tracking DNA methylation-based biological age over 8 years and its association with mortality in community-dwelling older adults.Clinical epigenetics · 2026Article
- Multimorbidity and functioning disparities in retired older adults: longitudinal trajectories, disease clusters, and mediating mechanisms.BMC geriatrics · 2026Article
- Midlife aging and performance study (MAPS): evaluating biological aging through a physical capacity battery.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Article
- Social Well-Being and Quality of Life Among Older Adults in Latvia-A Country with the Lowest Healthy Life Years in the EU.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Quality-adjusted life expectancy norms for the Canadian population using EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Deriving and comparing healthy longevity distributions by gender and health prevalence measures: a statistical moments and maximum entropy approach.Population health metrics · 2026Article
- Navigating stress: workplace resilience and mental health nursing in Egyptian psychiatric hospitals.BMC nursing · 2026Article
245 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This review examines sex differences in health and survival, with a focus on the Nordic countries. There is a remarkable discrepancy between the health and survival of the sexes: men are physically stronger and have fewer disabilities, but have substantially higher mortality at all ages compared with women: the so-called male-female health-survival paradox. A number of proposed explanations for this paradox are rooted in biological, social, and psychological interpretations. It is likely to be due to multiple causes that include fundamental biological differences between the sexes such as genetic factors, immune system responses, hormones, and disease patterns. Behavioral differences such as risk-taking and reluctance to seek and comply with medical treatment may also play a role. Another consideration is that part of the difference may be due to methodological challenges, such as selective non-participation and under-reporting of health problems, and delayed seeking of treatment by men. The Nordic countries provide a unique opportunity for such studies, as they have good-quality data in their national health registers, which cover the whole population, and a long tradition of high participation rates in surveys.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.