The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gender differences in drug effects: implications for anesthesiologists
Abstract
Background: The gender aspect in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anesthetics has attracted little attention. Knowledge of previous work is required to decide if gender‐based differences in clinical practice is justified, and to determine the need for research. Methods: Basis for this paper was obtained by Medline searches using the key words ‘human’ and ‘gender’ or ‘sex,’ combined with individual drug names. The reference lists of these papers were further checked for other relevant studies. Results: Females have 20–30% greater sensitivity to the muscle relaxant effects of vecuronium, pancuronium and rocuronium. When rapid onset of or short duration of action is very important, gender‐modified dosing may be considered. Males are more sensitive than females to propofol. It may therefore be necessary to decrease the propofol dose by 30–40% in males compared with females in order to achieve similar recovery times. Females are more sensitive than males to opioid receptor agonists, as shown for morphine as well as for a number of kappa (OP 2) receptor agonists. On this basis, males will be expected to require 30–40% higher doses of opioid analgesics than females to achieve similar pain relief. On the other hand, females may experience respiratory depression and other adverse effects more easily if they are given the same doses as males. Conclusion: These examples illustrate that gender should be taken into account as a factor that may be predictive for the dosage of several anesthetic drugs. Moreover, there is an obvious need for more research in this area in order to further optimize drug treatment in anesthesia.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Shimada, T., Yamazaki, H., Mimura, M., Inui, Y., & Guengerich, F. P. (1994) · The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3565(25)22379-5 · Cited by 2,785
Cited by
Sex Differences in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics
Soldin, O. P., & Mattison, D. R. (2009) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/00003088-200948030-00001 · Cited by 1,163
Resistance to cancer chemotherapy: failure in drug response from ADME to P-gp
Alfarouk, K. O., Stock, C.-M., Taylor, S., Walsh, M., Muddathir, A. K., Verduzco, D., Bashir, A. H. H., Mohammed, O. Y., Elhassan, G. O., Harguindey, S., et al. (2015) · Cancer Cell International · doi:10.1186/s12935-015-0221-1 · Cited by 665
Sex Differences in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics
Gandhi, M., Aweeka, F., Greenblatt, R. M., & Blaschke, T. F. (2004) · Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology · doi:10.1146/annurev.pharmtox.44.101802.121453 · Cited by 542
Gender differences in drug responses
FRANCONI, F., BRUNELLESCHI, S., STEARDO, L., & CUOMO, V (2007) · Pharmacological Research · doi:10.1016/j.phrs.2006.11.001 · Cited by 454
Chou, W. ‐., Yang, L. ‐., Lu, H. ‐., Ko, J. ‐., Wang, C. ‐., Lin, S. ‐., Lee, T. ‐., Concejero, A., & Hsu, C. ‐. (2006) · Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/j.1399-6576.2006.01058.x · Cited by 296
Metadata
- Authors
- Pleym, H., Spigset, O., Kharasch, E. D., & Dale, O.
- Venue
- Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-03
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 241-259
- ISSN
- 0001-5172 (ISSN-L)
- 1399-6576
- OpenAlex
- W1967884144
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gender differences in drug effects: implications for anesthesiologists. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00036.x
- The paper
- Pleym, H., Spigset, O., Kharasch, E. D., & Dale, O. (2003). Gender differences in drug effects: implications for anesthesiologists. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00036.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.