ArticleScientific reports2025
A sex-adjusted 7-biomarker clinical aging clock for translational preventative medicine.
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 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.
- Biological aging, circulating lipid biomarkers and pancreatic diseases: a prospective cohort study based on the UK Biobank.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2026Article
- Cardiac and systemic biological age capture complementary aging signals associated with cardiovascular disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological aging clocks capture heterogeneous rates of aging in individuals and transform current medical practice toward translational preventive medicine. Here, we developed a clinical aging clock based on routine blood biochemistry markers from 59,741 healthy samples in a Southeast Asian cohort. We established a novel correction method to address the systematic skew in predictions from first-generation clocks. This correction improved the accuracy of age-acceleration predictions for disease risks and enhanced interpretability for disease-driven and organ-specific aging processes without relying on mortality data. Based on only seven biomarkers, our clock accurately predicts both self-reported and physician-annotated ICD health data, indicating an increased hazard ratio. Importantly, the clock is robust even in the presence of acute infections or transient immune activation. To demonstrate the multi-ethnic generalizability of our biological age clock, we validated our approach using data from both the NHANES and UK Biobank cohorts. Our approach demonstrates the feasibility of a simple, robust, and interpretable clinical aging clock with potential for real-world implementation in personalized health monitoring and preventive care.
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.