Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35822006›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in aging2021

Sex Differences in Pulmonary Hypertension.

Juan José Rodriguez-Arias, Ana García-Álvarez

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in aging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Juan José Rodriguez-AriasCardiology Department, Institut Clínic Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Madrid, Spain.
Ana García-ÁlvarezCardiology Department, Institut Clínic Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Madrid, Spain.
Hospital Clínic de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pulmonary hypertension (PH) includes multiple diseases that share as common characteristic an elevated pulmonary artery pressure and right ventricular involvement. Sex differences are observed in practically all causes of PH. The most studied type is pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) which presents a gender bias regarding its prevalence, prognosis, and response to treatment. Although this disease is more frequent in women, once affected they present a better prognosis compared to men. Even if estrogens seem to be the key to understand these differences, animal models have shown contradictory results leading to the birth of the estrogen paradox. In this review we will summarize the evidence regarding sex differences in experimental animal models and, very specially, in patients suffering from PAH or PH from other etiologies.

Indexed as

animal modelsestrogen paradoxestrogen receptorsestrogenspulmonary hypertensionpulmonary hypertension groupssex

Identifiers

PMID35822006
PMCPMC9261364
OpenAlexW3202424854

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.