SynthesisClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2025
Consideration of sex/gender aspects in cardiovascular clinical trials.
Synthesis in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transthyretin Cardiac Amyloidosis in Women: Underdiagnosis, Sex-Specific Phenotypic Expression and Therapeutic Response.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding sex/gender in the context of health and disease is critical to deliver the best care. However, sex/gender have not been consistently considered in cardiovascular clinical trials. Global initiatives, including the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER)-guidelines, aim to improve the quality of the reporting, but it remains unclear if they are used consistently.
methodsWe conducted a systematic analysis of cardiovascular clinical trials published in PubMed between 2018 and 2024. To investigate the representation of women/females, we first analyzed the participation-prevalence-ratio (PPR). Second, we measured sex/gender-sensitive reporting (SGR) applying modified SAGER-guidelines. In addition, we determined whether study author sex/gender impacts the other variables.
findingsWe identified 1593 clinical trials with a total of 716,569 woman/female participants (38.5%). The median PPR of all trials remained suboptimal at 0.77 (95%-CI: 0.74-0.79) throughout the years with a modest positive trend towards 2024 and significant underrepresentation in some disease entities (e.g., ischemic heart disease, heart failure). Analyzing an evenly distributed sample of 632 trials, we found suboptimal SGR, especially for endpoints and discussions. We found a positive correlation of increased participation of women/females and SGR with women/females as authors.
interpretationOur results suggest an ongoing imbalance for the participation of women/females and suboptimal SGR in cardiovascular clinical trials, especially for certain diseases, with a modest positive trend. More women/females in the authorship team correlate with an increased PPR and are associated with an increase in SGR.
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.