Reviewnpj aging2025
Do we actually need aging clocks?
Review in npj aging, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A generator-matrix model quantifies the limited contribution of measured biomarkers to human mortality acceleration.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Aging as Loss of Biological Self-Correction: A Geroscience Framework for Longevity, Inflammaging, and Restored Resilience.Geriatrics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Hierarchical endpoints and win statistics for geromedicine trials.Nature aging · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Aging clocks use machine learning to estimate biological age as a proxy for general health state. Here, we critically examine their practical value, highlighting fundamental challenges: abstract definitions, inconsistent clinical validation, and ignored prediction uncertainty. By comparing aging clocks with expert risk scores, direct outcome predictors, and emerging large health models, we question their benefits and encourage researchers to explicitly justify clock advantage over established alternatives, ensuring truly actionable insights.
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.