ReviewCurrent heart failure reports2024
Implications of Sex Differences on the Treatment Effectiveness in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction Related to Clinical Endpoints and Quality of Life.
Review in Current heart failure reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive analysis of heart failure: Characteristics, treatment, and outcomes in a reduced ejection fraction patient cohort from SIDIAP, Catalonia, Spain.Atencion primaria · 2026Article
- Sex Differences in Antiarrhythmic Effects of Empagliflozin: The EMPA-ICD Trial Subanalysis.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- SGLT2 Inhibitors in Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Sex - Specific Cardiovascular Outcomes.Current cardiology reviews · 2026Article
- Gender disparities in heart failure diagnosis and management: under the radar.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Innovative design and modelling to improve sex and gender analysis in clinical trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Sex-specific differences in heart failure outcomes in Turkiye - a 2024 urban-rural analysis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- Mechanism of post cardiac arrest syndrome based on animal models of cardiac arrest.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Review
- Sex differences in diagnosis and treatment of heart failure: toward precision medicine.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of the reviewThis narrative review will emphasize the necessity for more female enrollment in heart failure (HF) trials and proposes future investigations regarding optimal dosages. Ultimately, a deeper understanding of the unique pathophysiology and medication responses in both men and women is crucial for effective HF management and may improve the quality of life in women. RECENT
findingsAn analysis of 740 cardiovascular studies reveals that women make up only 38.2% of participants on average. Regarding to trials testing the effectiveness of HF medications, women's involvement are as low as 23.1%. While current guidelines lack sex-specific treatment recommendations, emerging research suggests differential medication dosages could be beneficial. Studies indicate that women may achieve comparable outcomes with lower doses of certain medications (angiotensin-receptor blockers) compared to men, signaling potential for more tailored dosing approaches. We advocate that the next step in HF research should prioritize the importance of tailoring treatment for HF patients by taking into account the variations in drug absorption and distribution among women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.