Go to JCI Insight
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Gastroenterology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Neuroscience
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • Vascular biology
    • All ...
  • Videos
    • ASCI Milestone Awards
    • Video Abstracts
    • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • Reviews
    • View all reviews ...
    • Neurodegeneration (Mar 2026)
    • Clinical innovation and scientific progress in GLP-1 medicine (Nov 2025)
    • Pancreatic Cancer (Jul 2025)
    • Complement Biology and Therapeutics (May 2025)
    • Evolving insights into MASLD and MASH pathogenesis and treatment (Apr 2025)
    • Microbiome in Health and Disease (Feb 2025)
    • Substance Use Disorders (Oct 2024)
    • View all review series ...
  • Viewpoint
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Editorials
    • Commentaries
    • Editor's notes
    • Reviews
    • Viewpoints
    • 100th anniversary
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • Reviews
  • Review series
  • ASCI Milestone Awards
  • Video Abstracts
  • Conversations with Giants in Medicine
  • In-Press Preview
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Letters to the Editor
  • Editorials
  • Commentaries
  • Editor's notes
  • Reviews
  • Viewpoints
  • 100th anniversary
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Revisiting sex as a biological variable in hypertension research
Michael J. Ryan, John S. Clemmer, Roy O. Mathew, Jessica L. Faulkner, Erin B. Taylor, Justine M. Abais-Battad, Fiona Hollis, Jennifer C. Sullivan
Michael J. Ryan, John S. Clemmer, Roy O. Mathew, Jessica L. Faulkner, Erin B. Taylor, Justine M. Abais-Battad, Fiona Hollis, Jennifer C. Sullivan
View: Text | PDF
Review Series

Revisiting sex as a biological variable in hypertension research

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

Half of adults in the United States have hypertension as defined by clinical practice guidelines. Interestingly, women are generally more likely to be aware of their hypertension and have their blood pressure controlled with treatment compared with men, yet hypertension-related mortality is greater in women. This may reflect the fact that the female sex remains underrepresented in clinical and basic science studies investigating the effectiveness of therapies and the mechanisms controlling blood pressure. This Review provides an overview of the impact of the way hypertension research has explored sex as a biological variable (SABV). Emphasis is placed on epidemiological studies, hypertension clinical trials, the genetics of hypertension, sex differences in immunology and gut microbiota in hypertension, and the effect of sex on the central control of blood pressure. The goal is to offer historical perspective on SABV in hypertension, highlight recent studies that include SABV, and identify key gaps in SABV inclusion and questions that remain in the field. Through continued awareness campaigns and engagement/education at the level of funding agencies, individual investigators, and in the editorial peer review system, investigation of SABV in the field of hypertension research will ultimately lead to improved clinical outcomes.

Authors

Michael J. Ryan, John S. Clemmer, Roy O. Mathew, Jessica L. Faulkner, Erin B. Taylor, Justine M. Abais-Battad, Fiona Hollis, Jennifer C. Sullivan

×

Usage data is cumulative from March 2025 through March 2026.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 36,446 2,197
PDF 1,165 56
Figure 895 2
Table 266 0
Citation downloads 274 0
Totals 39,046 2,255
Total Views 41,301

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2026 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN: 0021-9738 (print), 1558-8238 (online)

Sign up for email alerts