EllaDx home
Science

Most of modern medicine
was never studied
on women.

Until 1993, women were legally excluded from most U.S. clinical trials. The reference ranges your doctor uses today - for thyroid, for iron, for hormones - were largely built from data on men.

We don't invent our own ranges. We use the same CLIA-accredited lab ranges your doctor does - and surface the peer-reviewed research on what's actually optimal for women, alongside every result.

01 - The gap

The numbers that made
us start this company.

01 / 04
23
%
Of cardiovascular trial participants are women
Despite heart disease being the leading cause of death for American women.
SourceJAMA Cardiology, 2022
02 / 04
9
yrs
Average delay to an endometriosis diagnosis
One in ten women will have it. Few will be diagnosed in time.
SourceAmerican Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2023
03 / 04
70
%
Of chronic pain patients are women
Yet 80% of pain research has been conducted on male subjects.
SourceNature Reviews Neuroscience, 2021
04 / 04
1 IN 3
Women over 40 have a thyroid condition
Most will go undiagnosed because standard TSH ranges miss them.
SourceJournal of Clinical Endocrinology, 2024
02 - Reference ranges

"In range"
for whom, exactly?

A reference range is a statistical statement: 95% of a population falls between these numbers. But which population matters enormously. Your results are reported against the standard CLIA lab range - we surface the peer-reviewed research on what's optimal for women, stratified by cycle phase and life stage, so "in range" isn't the end of the story.

TSH
mIU/L

Standard range was set on a mixed population. Published guidelines suggest optimal thyroid function in women - particularly those trying to conceive - sits much lower.1,2

  1. 1.
    Alexander EK, Pearce EN, Brent GA, et al. (2017). Thyroid, 27(3): 315–3892017 ATA Guidelines - preconception TSH target <2.5 mIU/L
  2. 2.
    Korevaar TIM, Medici M, Visser TJ, Peeters RP. (2017). Nature Reviews Endocrinology, 13(10): 610–622
Standard lab range
Reported on every result
0.44.5
2.5 Research-backed optimal
0.44.5
Ferritin
ng/mL

The textbook lower bound of 10 ng/mL is based on 'not anemic.' Studies show women with ferritin below 50 ng/mL commonly report fatigue, hair loss, and restless legs.1,2

  1. 1.
    Vaucher P, Druais PL, Waldvogel S, Favrat B. (2012). CMAJ, 184(11): 1247–1254Iron supplementation reduced fatigue in non-anemic women with ferritin <50
  2. 2.
    Rushton DH. (2002). Clinical & Experimental Dermatology, 27(5): 396–404
Standard lab range
Reported on every result
10200
50 Research-backed optimal
10200
Vitamin D
nmol/L

Levels associated with bone health in post-menopausal women, in the published literature, are meaningfully higher than the legacy sufficiency floor.1,2

  1. 1.
    Holick MF, Binkley NC, Bischoff-Ferrari HA, et al. (2011). J Clin Endocrinol Metab, 96(7): 1911–1930Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline
  2. 2.
    Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Willett WC, Orav EJ, et al. (2012). New England Journal of Medicine, 367(1): 40–49
Standard lab range
Reported on every result
30125
60 Research-backed optimal
30125
Estradiol (luteal)
pg/mL

Generic 'female' ranges collapse three different hormonal states into one. Published phase-specific ranges give a much clearer read on a cycling woman's labs.1

  1. 1.
    Stricker R, Eberhart R, Chevailler MC, et al. (2006). Clin Chem Lab Med, 44(7): 883–887Phase-specific reference intervals for estradiol, LH, FSH, progesterone
Standard lab range
Reported on every result
30400
100 Research-backed optimal
30400
03 - Validation

How a biomarker
earns its place in a panel.

Six steps, from clinical question to quarterly revalidation. Every marker in every panel has been through all of them.

01
Clinical question first
Symptom → hypothesis

Every panel starts with a specific symptom pattern women report. We don't build panels from a price list of available assays - we build them from the questions a 34-year-old with fatigue actually needs answered.

02
Literature & meta-analysis
Evidence grading A–D

Our medical team reviews the published evidence. We look for assays with peer-reviewed support for female-specific clinical utility - and flag the ones where the data is still thin.

03
Assay selection & validation
CV < 8% on ultrasensitive assays

Every assay runs through Quest Diagnostics - CLIA/CAP-accredited and the largest clinical lab network in the U.S. For sensitive markers (estradiol, testosterone) we use the ultrasensitive LC/MS methods Quest validates for low-concentration female ranges.

04
Female-specific literature review
Peer-reviewed, cited

For every biomarker we include, our medical team pulls the peer-reviewed research on what's optimal for women - by age, cycle phase, and life stage. Results ship with that context alongside the standard lab range, not in place of it.

05
Physician panel sign-off
3-physician consensus

Before a panel goes live, three board-certified physicians sign off on its design: which biomarkers are included, which cycle day is used, and which reference ranges trigger a flag on the report.

06
Continuous literature review
Refreshed every 6 mo

Every six months our medical team re-reads the evidence base. Biomarkers with weakening support get retired from panels. New peer-reviewed research gets folded into the educational context women see alongside their results.

04 - The evidence

Every claim, sourced.

Papers that shaped how we think about women's diagnostics - and the ones we keep returning to when building new panels.

01
Vogel B, Acevedo M, Appelman Y, et al. (2021)
The Lancet women and cardiovascular disease Commission: reducing the global burden by 2030
The Lancet, 397(10292): 2385–2438
Cardiovascular
02
Westergaard D, Moseley P, Sørup FKH, et al. (2019)
Population-wide analysis of differences in disease progression patterns in men and women
Nature Communications, 10: 666
Diagnostic delay
03
Mogil JS. (2020)
Qualitative sex differences in pain processing: emerging evidence of a biased literature
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 21: 353–365
Pain research
04
Razvi S, Bhana S, Mrabeti S. (2019)
Challenges in interpreting thyroid stimulating hormone results in the diagnosis of thyroid dysfunction
Journal of Thyroid Research, 4106816
Reference ranges
05
Zondervan KT, Becker CM, Missmer SA. (2020)
Endometriosis
New England Journal of Medicine, 382: 1244–1256
Diagnostic delay
06
Mirin AA. (2021)
Gender disparity in the funding of diseases by the U.S. National Institutes of Health
Journal of Women's Health, 30(7): 956–963
Research funding
07
Soldin OP, Mattison DR. (2009)
Sex differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics
Clinical Pharmacokinetics, 48(3): 143–157
Sex differences
08
Merz AA, Cheng S. (2016)
Sex differences in cardiovascular ageing
Heart, 102(11): 825–831
Cardiovascular
09
Daitch V, Turjeman A, Poran I, et al. (2022)
Underrepresentation of women in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review
Trials, 23: 1038
Clinical trials

Full bibliography of 240+ papers available at elladx.com/research · Last updated Q1 2026

Be counted

The dataset gets better
every time you test.

Every woman who tests with us makes the case for more female-focused research - louder demand, better evidence, better panels. This is how the gap closes.