Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31547515›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2019

Advances in Precision Health and Emerging Diagnostics for Women.

Megan B Fitzpatrick, Avnesh S Thakor

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Megan B FitzpatrickInterventional Regenerative Medicine and Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA. megan6@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7040-8018
Avnesh S ThakorInterventional Regenerative Medicine and Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA. asthakor@stanford.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-7395-0515

Funding

Stanford University Precision Health and Integrated Diagnostics Center (PHIND) n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the Dutch winter famine of 1944-1945, an interesting observation was made about the offspring born during this time-They had an increased risk of developing metabolic syndrome and other chronic diseases. Subsequent research has confirmed this finding as well as noting that health outcomes for many diseases are different, and often worse, for women. These findings, combined with the lack of enrollment of women in clinical trials and/or analysis of sex-specific differences are important factors which need to be addressed. In fact, Women's health research and sex differences have historically been overlooked or lumped together and assumed equivalent to those of men. Hence, a focus on women's health and disease prevention is critical to improve the lives of women in the 21st Century. In this review, we point out the critical differences biologically and socially that present both challenges and opportunities for development of novel platforms for precision health. The technologic and scientific advances specific to women's precision health have the potential to improve the health and wellbeing for all females across the world.

Indexed as

FemtechMedTechprecision healthpreventive healthwomen’s health

Identifiers

PMID31547515
PMCPMC6832724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.