ArticleFrontiers in aging2026
The negligible biological impact of reproductive history on aging: a high-resolution variance analysis.
Article in Frontiers in aging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Modern epigenetics increasingly employs biological clocks to quantify the impact of women's reproductive history on aging, with a very recent study claiming that childbearing significantly decelerates biological senescence in women. This article critically re-examines these claims, challenging the growing trend of biological determinism imposed on reproductive choices. By performing a secondary upper-bound analysis on demographic and epigenetic data, we quantify the predictive power of reproductive history relative to the dominant influence of genetic and stochastic factors. Our analysis reveals that a reported 1-year acceleration in biological aging for women without children, while statistically significant in massive cohorts, possesses negligible explanatory power. When evaluated against the standard deviation of high-longevity populations, this 1-year shift corresponds to ∼1.2% of variance scale in female lifespan, leaving 98.8% governed by stochastic noise. With a standardized effect size near zero (
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.