Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Sex and Age Differences in Lipoprotein Subclasses Measured by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy: The Framingham Study

Freedman, David S, Otvos, James D, Jeyarajah, Elias J, Shalaurova, Irina, Cupples, L Adrienne, Parise, Helen, D’Agostino, Ralph B, Wilson, Peter W F, Schaefer, Ernst J·2004·Clinical Chemistry

Abstract

Background: The sex differential in coronary heart disease (CHD) risk, which is not explained by male/female differences in lipid and lipoprotein concentrations, narrows with age. We examined whether this differential CHD risk might, in part, be attributable to the sizes of lipoprotein particles or concentrations of lipoprotein subclasses. Methods: We analyzed frozen plasma samples from 1574 men and 1692 women from exam cycle 4 (1988–1990) of the Framingham Offspring Study. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy was used to determine the subclass concentrations and mean sizes of VLDL, LDL, and HDL particles. Concentrations of lipids and apolipoproteins were measured by standard chemical methods. Results: In addition to the expected sex differences in concentrations of triglycerides, LDL-cholesterol, and HDL-cholesterol, women also had a lower-risk subclass profile consisting of larger LDL (0.4 nm) and HDL (0.5 nm) particles. The sex difference was most pronounced for HDL, with women having a twofold higher (8 vs 4 μmol/L) concentration of large HDL particles than men. Furthermore, similar to the narrowing of the sex difference in CHD risk with age, the observed male/female difference in HDL particle size also decreased with age. Although lipoprotein particle sizes were highly correlated with lipid and lipoprotein concentrations, the sex differences in the mean sizes of lipoprotein particles persisted (P <0.001) even after adjustment for lipid and lipoprotein concentrations. Conclusions: Women have a less atherogenic subclass profile than men, even after accounting for differences in lipid concentrations.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1373/clinchem.2004.032763

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Freedman, D. S., Otvos, J. D., Jeyarajah, E. J., Shalaurova, I., Cupples, L. A., Parise, H., D’Agostino, R. B., Wilson, P. W. F., & Schaefer, E. J.
Venue
Clinical Chemistry
Published
2004-07-01
Volume
50
Issue
7
Pages
1189-1200
ISSN
  • 0009-9147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8561
OpenAlex
W2162705046
Cited by
304
References
6
FWCI
19.69
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: Sex and Age Differences in Lipoprotein Subclasses Measured by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy: The Framingham Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1373/clinchem.2004.032763
The paper
Freedman, D. S., Otvos, J. D., Jeyarajah, E. J., Shalaurova, I., Cupples, L. A., Parise, H., D’Agostino, R. B., Wilson, P. W. F., & Schaefer, E. J. (2004). Sex and Age Differences in Lipoprotein Subclasses Measured by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy: The Framingham Study. Clinical Chemistry. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2004.032763

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.