ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2010
Age difference explains gender difference in cardiac intervention rates after acute myocardial infarction.
Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reassessing access to intensive care using an estimate of the population incidence of critical illness.Critical care (London, England) · 2018Article
- Using decision trees for measuring gender equity in the timing of angiography in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a novel approach to equity analysis.International journal for equity in health · 2015Article
- Sex, socioeconomic status, access to cardiac catheterization, and outcomes for acute coronary syndromes in the context of universal healthcare coverage.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2014Article
- Epidemiology of critically ill patients in intensive care units: a population-based observational study.Critical care (London, England) · 2013Observational
- Main causes of death among Swedish women born 1914 and 1918: 32-year follow-up of the Population Study of Women in Gothenburg.International journal of general medicine · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many investigators have reported higher rates of cardiac procedures for males than females after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), suggesting that men are treated more aggressively than women. However, others have reported no significant differences after controlling for age, resulting in uncertainty about the existence of a true gender bias in cardiac care. In this study, a population-based cohort approach was used to calculate age-specific procedure rates by sex from administrative data. Chi-square tests and generalized linear modelling were used to assess gender differences and interactions. For all four procedures studied, rates were significantly higher for males than females (p<0.01). However, age-specific rates revealed few significant differences by gender and a sharp decrease in intervention rates with age for both males and females. Generalized linear modelling confirmed that patient age was a significant predictor of intervention rates, whereas sex was not. The significant gender difference in overall rates was completely confounded by the older age profile of female AMI patients compared to their male counterparts.
Identifiers
21804840PMC2929899W2023700590What 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.