ArticleFrontiers in global women's health2022
Addressing persistent evidence gaps in cardiovascular sex differences research - the potential of clinical care data.
Article in Frontiers in global women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Elevated cardiovascular risk associated with hormone replacement therapy: A comprehensive analysis of reproductive factors and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease outcomes in the UK Biobank cohort.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Observational
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Women have historically been underrepresented in cardiovascular clinical trials, resulting in a lack of sex-specific data. This is especially problematic in two situations, namely those where diseases manifest differently in women and men and those where biological differences between the sexes might affect the efficacy and/or safety of medication. There is therefore a pressing need for datasets with proper representation of women to address questions related to these situations. Clinical care data could fit this bill nicely because of their unique broad scope across both patient groups and clinical measures. This perspective piece presents the potential of clinical care data in sex differences research and discusses current challenges clinical care data-based research faces. It also suggests strategies to reduce the effect of these limitations, and explores whether clinical care data alone will be sufficient to close evidence gaps or whether a more comprehensive approach is needed.
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.