ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2016
Genetic Research and Women's Heart Disease: a Primer.
Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward Precision Medicine in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: Insights from Omics Data into Sex Differences.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Mitochondria, Sex, and Cardiovascular Disease: A Complex Interplay.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Integration of sex and gender in cardiovascular medicine: a scientific and clinical imperative.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023Article
- Chest Pain in Women: Gender- and Sex-based Differences in the Presentation and Diagnosis of Heart Disease.US cardiology · 2023Review
- Genetics of Subclinical Coronary Atherosclerosis.Current genetic medicine reports · 2018Article
- Genetic variants associated with earlier age at menopause increase the risk of cardiovascular events in women.Menopause (New York, N.Y.) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review provides a brief synopsis of sexual dimorphism in atherosclerosis with an emphasis on genetic studies aimed to better understand the atherosclerotic process and clinical outcomes in women. Such studies are warranted because development of atherosclerosis, impact of several traditional risk factors, and burden of coronary heart disease (CHD) differ between women and men. RECENT
findingsWhile most candidate gene studies pool women and men and adjust for sex, some sex-specific studies provide evidence of association between candidate genes and prevalent and incident CHD in women. So far, most genome-wide association studies (GWAS) also failed to consider sex-specific associations. The few GWAS focused on women tended to have small sample sizes and insufficient power to reject the null hypothesis of no association even if associations exist. Few studies consider that sex can modify the effect of gene variants on CHD. Sufficiently large-scale genetic studies in women of different race/ethnic groups, taking into account possible gene-gene and gene-environment interactions as well as hormone-mediated epigenetic mechanisms, are needed. Using the same disease definition for women and men might not be appropriate. Accurate phenotyping and inclusion of relevant outcomes in women, together with targeting the entire spectrum of atherosclerosis, could help address the contribution of genes to sexual dimorphism in atherosclerosis. Discovered genetic loci should be taken forward for replication and functional studies to elucidate the plausible underlying biological mechanisms. A better understanding of the etiology of atherosclerosis in women would facilitate future prevention efforts and interventions.
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.