ArticleBMC health services research2007
Gender differences in the clinical management of patients with angina pectoris: a cross-sectional survey in primary care.
Article in BMC health services research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex Differences in Cardiovascular Medication Prescription in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Pooled it
- Physician clinical information technology and health care disparities.Medical care research and review : MCRR · 2009Trial
- Inconsistency in UK Biobank Event Definitions From Different Data Sources and Its Impact on Bias and Generalizability: A Case Study of Venous Thromboembolism.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Gender Bias in Diagnosis, Prevention, and Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases: A Systematic Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Independent medical evaluation of general practitioners' follow-up of sick-listed patients: a cross-sectional study in Norway.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Preventing and Experiencing Ischemic Heart Disease as a Woman: State of the Science: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation · 2016Review
- Use of exercise tests in primary care: importance for referral decisions and possible bias in the decision process; a prospective observational study.BMC family practice · 2014Observational
- Presentation, management, and outcomes of ischaemic heart disease in women.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2013Review
- Does the use of an electronic reminder device with or without counseling improve adherence to lipid-lowering treatment? The results of a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2013Article
- Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry.European heart journal · 2012Article
- Gender bias revisited: new insights on the differential management of chest pain.BMC family practice · 2011Article
- Non-clinical influences on clinical decision-making: a major challenge to evidence-based practice.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2010Review
- Physician cognitive processing as a source of diagnostic and treatment disparities in coronary heart disease: results of a factorial priming experiment.Journal of health and social behavior · 2010Article
- Is stapled ileal pouch anal anastomosis a safe option in ulcerative colitis patients with dysplasia or cancer?International journal of colorectal disease · 2009Article
- Ischemic heart disease and primary care: identifying gender-related differences. An observational study.BMC family practice · 2008Article
- Protective vascular treatment of patients with peripheral arterial disease: guideline adherence according to year, age and gender.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publiqueArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious research suggests that women admitted to hospital with acute myocardial infarction (MI) are managed less intensively than men. Chronic stable angina is the commonest clinical manifestation of coronary heart disease in the community, but little information is available concerning its contemporary clinical management. The aim of this study is to assess the extent of gender differences in the clinical management of angina pectoris in primary care.
methodsA cross-sectional survey undertaken in 8 sentinel centres serving 63,724 individuals in the city of Liverpool (15% of the city population). Aspects of clinical care assessed included: risk factor recording (smoking, cholesterol, blood pressure, body mass index); secondary prevention (aspirin, beta-blocker, statin); cardiac investigation (exercise ECG, perfusion scanning, angiography); and revascularisation (percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting). Male-to-female adjusted odds ratios (AOR) were calculated (adjusted for age, angina duration, age at diagnosis and previous MI) using logistic regression.
results1,162 patients (610 men; 552 women) with angina were identified. Women were older than men (71 vs 67 years), with a shorter duration of angina (6 vs 7 years), and a lower prevalence of previous MI (25% vs 43%). Men were significantly more likely than women to undergo detailed risk factor assessment (AOR = 1.35, 95%CI 1.06 to 1.73); receive 'triple' secondary prevention with aspirin, beta-blockers and statins (AOR = 1.47, 95%CI 1.07 to 2.02); access exercise ECG testing (AOR = 1.31, 95%CI 1.02 to 1.68); angiography (AOR = 1.61, 95%CI 1.23 to 2.12); and undergo coronary revascularisation (AOR = 1.93, 95%CI 1.39 to 2.68).
conclusionSystematic gender differences exist in the comprehensive clinical management of patients with angina in primary care.
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.