ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2002
Gender differences in clinical status at time of coronary revascularisation in Spain.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Women With Obstructive Coronary Disease Requiring Revascularization: A Meta-analysis.CJC open · 2024Review
- [Influence of gender and place of residence differences on the evolution and mortality of ischemic cardiopathy in Catalonia: a population-based study.]Revista espanola de salud publica · 2023Article
- Gender-related differences in coronary artery dimensions: a volumetric analysis.Clinical cardiology · 2010Article
- Sex differences in use of interventional cardiology persist after risk adjustment.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study gender differences in clinical status at the time of coronary revascularisation.
designRetrospective study of clinical records. Two stage stratified cluster sampling was used to select a nationally representative sample of patients receiving a coronary revascularisation procedure in 1997.
settingAll of Spain.
main outcome measuresOdds ratios (OR) in men and women for different clinical and diagnostic variables related with coronary disease. A logistic regression model was developed to estimate the association between coronary symptoms and gender.
resultsIn the univariate analysis the prevalence of the following risk factors for coronary heart disease was higher in women than in men: obesity (OR=1.8), hypertension (OR=2.9) and diabetes (OR=2.1). High surgical risk was also more prevalent among women (OR=2.6). In the logistic regression analysis women's risk of being symptomatic at the time of revascularisation was more than double that of men (OR=2.4).
conclusionsWomen have more severe coronary symptoms at the time of coronary revascularisation than do men. These results suggest that women receive revascularisation at a more advanced stage of coronary disease. Further research is needed to clarify what social, cultural or biological factors may be implicated in the gender differences observed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.