ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2016
Aspirin Use in Women: Current Perspectives and Future Directions.
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 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Postpartum Interventions to Reduce Long-Term Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Women After Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Tailoring low-dose aspirin to prevent preeclampsia: translational and biomarker insights.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Review
- Multi-omic insights of preeclampsia and cardiovascular health outcomes.Communications medicine · 2025Review
- COVID-19 therapeutics: Clinical application of repurposed drugs and futuristic strategies for target-based drug discovery.Genes & diseases · 2023Review
- Aspirin modulates production of pro-inflammatory and pro-resolving mediators in endothelial cells.PloS one · 2023Article
- Preeclampsia as a Form of Type 5 Cardiorenal Syndrome: An Underrecognized Entity in Women's Cardiovascular Health.Cardiorenal medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review examines the recent literature on the use of low-dose aspirin (LDA) for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in women, use of LDA for pre-eclampsia prevention in pregnancy, and the underutilization of aspirin therapy in women as compared to men. RECENT
findingsWhile men and women should not differ with respect to aspirin use for secondary prevention, its role in primary prevention remains unclear for both sexes, with particular uncertainty in women. Reflective of this are conflicting recommendations in current guidelines for primary prevention and thus investigations of primary prevention aspirin use are ongoing and will play an important role in elucidating its efficacy. While there is significant heterogeneity in studies to date of LDA for pre-eclampsia prevention, based on recent meta-analyses suggesting promising results, guidelines now recommend initiation in high risk women after the 12th week of gestation. Finally, studies consistently reveal that aspirin therapy is underutilized in women as compared to men, suggesting a need to better educate physicians and the general public about its use in women. Further research is needed to better elucidate the role of aspirin in women for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease and for pre-eclampsia in high risk pregnant women. In addition, further investigation into the factors that lead to the current underutilization of aspirin in women are required in order to ensure that patients of both sexes are optimally treated, with the goal of improving cardiovascular outcomes in all patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27807733What 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.