2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2019.107442
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sex difference in the association between surrogate markers of insulin resistance and arterial stiffness

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

5
64
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(71 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
5
64
2
Order By: Relevance
“…[8] Nevertheless, previous studies have shown that VAI is more in uential in females. [13,17,18] We, therefore, conducted a strati ed multivariable analysis by sex to con rm these results. All variables with P < 0.05 were considered signi cant in this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…[8] Nevertheless, previous studies have shown that VAI is more in uential in females. [13,17,18] We, therefore, conducted a strati ed multivariable analysis by sex to con rm these results. All variables with P < 0.05 were considered signi cant in this study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Previous studies investigating atherosclerosis or cardiovascular diseases have shown similar results, but the cause of these results is not clear. [13,17,18] They speculate that the hormonal difference between males and females or differences in composition of VAT and SAT underlie these results. [17] Based on our ndings, we propose a slightly different reason.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…(3) Certain studies have also identi ed an important correlation between TyG index and coronary artery calci cation [55], which may be another potential mechanism. (4) The TyG index has been also demonstrated to be related to arterial stiffness evaluated by pulse pressure, brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity, which has been recognized as cardiovascular risk predictor [10,[56][57][58].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%