ArticleScientific reports2025
Sex differences in the risk of incident systemic sclerosis: a nationwide population-based study with subgroup analyses.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterisation of Systemic Sclerosis in a Jordanian Cohort: Clinical Features, Diagnostic Patterns, and Health-Related Quality of Life.Mediterranean journal of rheumatology · 2026Article
- Aging and rare diseases: from epidemiology to a call to action.European geriatric medicine · 2026Article
- Epithelial-mesenchymal transition in cutaneous fibrosis disease: from mechanisms to therapy.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Systemic sclerosis and primary biliary cholangitis: a systematic review of case-control studies comparing isolated and overlapping disease phenotypes.Journal of scleroderma and related disorders · 2026Article
- Changes in Lung Ultrasound in Systemic Sclerosis Before and After Rehabilitation: A Comparative Study Between People with and Without Interstitial Lung Disease.Advances in respiratory medicine · 2025Article
- Sex differences in systemic sclerosis: from pathogenesis to clinical manifestations and treatment.Therapeutic advances in musculoskeletal disease · 2025Review
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
Abstract
Although higher prevalence of systemic sclerosis (SSc) in women than in men is well-known, it is unclear to what degree women are at higher risk of developing incident SSc. This study aims to assess the risk of incident SSc comparing women vs. men, and to identify subsets of individuals in whom the risk difference according to sex is more prominent. An analysis of a Korean nationwide cohort of 9,894,996 individuals was conducted. All individuals were followed up from 2009 to 2019. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the risk of incident SSc comparing women vs. men. Subgroup analysis was conducted by stratifying individuals according to multiple covariates. The absolute risk of SSc in men (i.e., background risk) was 0.004% (95% CI 0.003-0.004), and the absolute risk of SSc in women was 0.025% (95% CI 0.023-0.027). The absolute risk difference between women and men was 0.021% (95% CI 0.019-0.024). Women had a significantly higher risk of incident SSc than men (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 5.275; 95% confidence interval, 4.346-6.403). The effect size was more pronounced in middle-aged individuals (aHR 5.020 [< 40 years] vs. 5.868 [40-64 years] vs. 2.734 [≥ 65 years]; p-interaction < 0.001); those without abdominal obesity (aHR 5.863 vs. 3.658; p-interaction = 0.005); those who did not exercise regularly (aHR 5.701 vs. 3.932; p-interaction = 0.030); and those without hypertension (aHR 5.996 vs. 4.053; p-interaction = 0.010) or dyslipidemia (aHR 5.857 vs. 3.330; p-interaction = 0.001). Women had a 5-fold higher risk of incident SSc than men. The higher risk was more prominent in middle-aged individuals, those without abdominal obesity, those who do not exercise regularly, and do not have hypertension or dyslipidemia.
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.