Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16144216›Full record

ArticleClinical cardiology2005

Physicians' attitudes toward preventive therapy for coronary artery disease: is there a gender bias?

Akranm Abuful, Yori Gidron, Yaakov Henkin

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical cardiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Challenges in Optimizing Lipid Management in Women.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Gender dimension in cardio-pulmonary continuum.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Gender Differences in the Diagnosis of Dyslipidemia: ESCARVAL-GENERO.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Akranm AbufulCardiology Department, Soroka University Medical Center and Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel.
Yori Gidron
Yaakov Henkin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile much of the gender difference in the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) results from the fact that the women being treated are older and have more comorbidities, it remains to be established whether a true gender bias exists. We compared physicians' attitudes and practice toward preventive therapy in men and women with CAD. HYPOTHESIS: Physicians perceive the prevention of CAD in men as more important than in women.

methodsIn the "attitude study," we obtained data on the attitudes of 172 physicians toward treatment, using hypothetical case histories of 58-year-old male and postmenopausal female patients with identical clinical and laboratory data and mild coronary atherosclerosis on angiography. In the "actual practice study," we evaluated the lipoprotein levels and prescription of lipid-lowering medications from medical records of 344 male and female patients with angiographic evidence of CAD.

resultsIn the hypothetical case histories, physicians in general considered the male patient to be at higher risk and prescribed aspirin (91 vs. 77%, p < 0.01) and lipid-lowering medications (67 vs. 54%, p < 0.07) more often for the male patient. Evaluation of medical charts of patients with CAD revealed that in patients with baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol > 110 mg/dl, 77% of the males received a lipid-lowering medication, compared with only 47% of the female patients (p < 0.001).

conclusionsWe found evidence for a gender bias in the attitude as well as in actual practice of secondary prevention toward patients with CAD. While the proportion of male patients receiving lipid-lowering medications appears appropriate, the proportion of women receiving such treatment remains undesirable.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelPrejudiceAdultAspirinCoronary DiseaseFemaleFibrinolytic AgentsHumansHypolipidemic AgentsMaleMiddle AgedPhysiciansPractice Patterns, Physicians'Risk AssessmentAspirinFibrinolytic AgentsHypolipidemic Agents

Identifiers

PMID16144216
PMCPMC6654010

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.