ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2023
Sex-Specific Thresholds for Cardiac Biomarkers-We Need to Move Forward.
Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quercetin Reduces Vascular Senescence and Inflammation in Symptomatic Male but Not Female Coronary Artery Disease Patients.Aging cell · 2025Trial
- The Clinical Value of NT-proBNP, sST2, and Galectin-3 in the Management of Heart Failure: From Diagnosis to Dynamic Monitoring: A Narrative Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Unveiling Heart Failure: Gender-Specific Insights and Innovations in Women's Cardiac Health.Current pharmaceutical design · 2026Review
- Endothelial Dysfunction with Aging: Does Sex Matter?International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
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
Cardiovascular biomarkers play a major diagnostic role for cardiologists. Different biomarkers provide different insights into a variety of cardiovascular conditions and in doing so they improve diagnosis and management. Often, these biomarkers are deployed without carefully evaluating the use of sex-specific cut off values. It is now becoming apparent that the use of such cut off values can improve prognostication and discrimination in some clinical situations. This review paper will focus on the data indicating that there is benefit to the use of sex-specific thresholds. It should be clear that these thresholds will vary depending on the analyte being measured and the specific clinical indication for which the patients are being evaluated; and sex-specific cut off values may be important in some situations but not others. Nonetheless, it is now clear that when evaluating sex-specific cut off values, one often finds benefit. We will highlight these situations using specific cardiac biomarkers as examples.
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.