Evidence mapPaperPMID 37664573Full record

ArticleClinical kidney journal2023

Shedding a light on sex disparity in clinical trials in CKD patients.

Francesca Mallamaci, Giovanni Tripepi

Abstract readEditorial
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Francesca MallamaciNephrology, Dialysis, and Transplantation Unit, Grande Ospedale Metropolitano "Bianchi-Melacrino-Morelli" of Reggio Calabria, Italy.
Giovanni TripepiInstitute of Clinical Physiology (IFC), National Research Council (CNR) of Reggio Calabria, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clinical studies do not include an adequate proportion of female participants, and research data on drug efficacy and safety are generally collected from studies including a majority of men and extrapolated to women. This article describes the imbalance of male and female distribution in clinical studies, including patients with chronic kidney disease. The lack of sex equity in clinical research is a real 'public health problem' because not reporting sex-specific results may result in the loss of information on how a drug works according to sex. Therefore, it is essential to plan more research in the field of sex disparities in clinical studies to identify why women are underrepresented and to promote initiatives to expand women's participation in clinical studies.

Indexed as

chronic kidney diseaseclinical studiessex equity

Identifiers

PMID37664573
PMCPMC10468738

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.