SynthesisBMC public health2026
Sex differences in multimorbidity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC public health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEmerging evidence suggests that sex and gender may influence the development, expression, and impact of multimorbidity through a range of mechanisms. This review aimed to examine the differences between women and men in the prevalence, risk factors, and patterns of multimorbidity, and sex differences regarding the impact of multimorbidity on health outcomes.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in Ovid Medline and Embase from inception until June 2025. Studies in human beings which reported data separately for women and men related to multimorbidity were included. Where possible, estimates from the included studies were pooled using inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis. Where available, the sex differential was quantified as the women-to-men ratio of prevalence, relative risks, hazard ratios or odds ratios. This review is registered at PROSPERO, CRD42024553043.
resultsThis review identified 37 studies of 5,828,856 individuals (60% women) from 24 countries. We summarised the findings on sex differences according to: (1) prevalence of multimorbidity, (2) risk factors for multimorbidity, (3) patterns of multimorbidity, and (4) the impact of multimorbidity on health outcomes. The pooled multimorbidity prevalence in the 31 general population studies were 0.45 (95%CI 0.35-0.56) in women and 0.39 (95%CI 0.30-0.50) in men, pooled women-to-men prevalence ratio for multimorbidity was 1.12 (95%CI 1.02-1.23). In studies in populations with an index disease, the prevalence of multimorbidity was much higher: 0.83 (95%CI 0.63-0.93) in women and 0.82 (95%CI 0.48-0.96) in men. There were limited studies examining sex differences in the patterns and risk factors for multimorbidity, and on the impact of multimorbidity on outcomes.
conclusionsOur systematic review reveals a higher prevalence of multimorbidity in women than men. The increased likelihood of multimorbidity in women compared to men is a complex issue influenced by multiple factors and highlights the need for further research on this topic.
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.