Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41935583›Full record

ReviewAgeing research reviews2026

Sex differences in response to longevity interventions.

Kaitlyn H Hajdarovic, Nicole C Riddle, Ashley E Webb

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ageing research reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Kaitlyn H HajdarovicThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA, USA; National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Nicole C RiddleDepartment of Biology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Ashley E WebbThe Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA, USA. Electronic address: awebb@buckinstitute.org.

Funding

Investigation of impaired neural stem cell activation in Alzheimer's DiseaseR01AG076933 · NIA · BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING · PI WEBB, ASHLEY E · 2022 to 2025
$1.7M
NIA NIH HHS R01 AG076933
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Interventions to extend lifespan and healthspan are of major interest, but such interventions may affect male and female organisms differently. Whether this is due sex-specific differences in baseline lifespan, or differences in sexually dimorphic characteristics such as body size, adiposity, metabolism, or even gonadal hormone or chromosome status remains unknown. Here we discuss the literature on how males and females respond differently to various types of interventions known to extend lifespan and explore possible underlying mechanisms. Ultimately, understanding sex as a biological variable in the context of aging may reveal sex-specific strategies to improve healthspan and treat age-related disease.

Indexed as

AgingLongevitySex CharacteristicsAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleAgingHealthspanLifespanLongevitySexSexual dimorphism

Identifiers

PMID41935583
PMCPMC13080664

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.