Scopus Publication Detail
The publication detail shows the title, authors (with indicators showing other profiled authors), information on the publishing organization, abstract and a link to the article in Scopus. This abstract is what is used to create the fingerprint of the publication.
Experimental Gerontology. 2014;51(1):15-27.Abstract
Background: It is widely believed that females have longer telomeres than males, although results from studies have been contradictory. Methods: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analyses to test the hypothesis that in humans, females have longer telomeres than males and that this association becomes stronger with increasing age. Searches were conducted in EMBASE and MEDLINE (by November 2009) and additional datasets were obtained from study investigators. Eligible observational studies measured telomeres for both females and males of any age, had a minimum sample size of 100 and included participants not part of a diseased group. We calculated summary estimates using random-effects meta-analyses. Heterogeneity between studies was investigated using sub-group analysis and meta-regression. Results: Meta-analyses from 36 cohorts (36,230 participants) showed that on average females had longer telomeres than males (standardised difference in telomere length between females and males 0.090, 95% CI 0.015, 0.166; age-adjusted). There was little evidence that these associations varied by age group (p = 1.00) or cell type (p = 0.29). However, the size of this difference did vary by measurement methods, with only Southern blot but neither real-time PCR nor Flow-FISH showing a significant difference. This difference was not associated with random measurement error. Conclusions: Telomere length is longer in females than males, although this difference was not universally found in studies that did not use Southern blot methods. Further research on explanations for the methodological differences is required. © 2013 The Authors.
This section shows information related to the publication - computed using the fingerprint of the publication - including related publications, related experts with fingerprints representing significant amounts of overlap between their fingerprint and this publication. The red dots indicate whether those experts or terms appear within the publication, thereby showing potential and actual connections.
Jean-Nicolas Cornu; Paul Abrams; Christopher R. Chapple; Roger R. Dmochowski; Gary E. Lemack; Martin C. Michel; Andrea Tubaro; Stephan MadersbacherEuropean Urology. 2012;62(5):877-890.
Mariaelisa Graff; Penny Gordon-Larsen; Unhee Lim; Jay H. Fowke; Shelly-Ann Love; Megan Fesinmeyer; Lynne R. Wilkens; Shawyntee Vertilus; Marilyn D. Ritchie; Ross L. Prentice; et al.Diabetes. 2013;62(5):1763-1767.
Yong Zhao; Hirotoshi Hoshiyama; Jerry W. Shay; Woodring E. WrightNucleic Acids Research. 2008;36(3).
Appears in this Document