Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22457480›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2012

Time trends in STEMI--improved treatment and outcome but still a gender gap: a prospective observational cohort study from the SWEDEHEART register.

Sofia Sederholm Lawesson, Joakim Alfredsson, Mats Fredrikson, Eva Swahn

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Evaluation of sex differences in patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction: an observational cohort study in Amsterdam and surrounding region.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Year in Cardiology 2018: ABC Cardiol and RPC at a glance.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2019
    Article
  20. Observational
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sofia Sederholm LawessonDepartment of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Linköping University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden.
Joakim Alfredsson
Mats Fredrikson
Eva Swahn
Linköping University Hospital · SELinköping University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn ST elevation myocardial infarction women received less evidence-based medicine and had worse outcome during the fibrinolytic era. With the shift to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) as preferred reperfusion strategy, the authors aimed to investigate whether these gender differences has diminished. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsCohort study including consecutive ST elevation myocardial infarction patients registered 1998-2000 (n=15 697) and 2004-2006 (n=14 380) in the Register of Information and Knowledge about Swedish Heart Intensive care Admissions. OUTCOME MEASURES: 1. Use of evidence-based medicine such as reperfusion therapy (pPCI or fibrinolysis) and evidence-based drugs at discharge. 2. Inhospital and 1-year mortality.

resultsOf those who got reperfusion therapy, pPCI was the choice in 9% in the early period compared with 68% in the late period. In the early period, reperfusion therapy was given to 63% of women versus 71% of men, p<0.001. Corresponding figures in the late period were 64% vs 75%, p<0.001. After multivariable adjustments, the ORs (women vs men) were 0.86 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.94) in the early and 0.80 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.89) in the late period. As regards evidence-based secondary preventive drugs at discharge in hospital survivors (platelet inhibitors, statins, ACE inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers and β-blockers), there were small gender differences in the early period. In the late period, women had 14%-25% less chance of receiving these drugs, OR 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.81) through 0.86 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.00). In both periods, multivariable-adjusted inhospital mortality was higher in women, OR 1.18 (95% CI 1.02 to 1.36) and 1.21 (1.00 to 1.46). One-year mortality was gender equal, HR 0.95 (95% CI 0.87 to 1.05) and 0.96 (0.86 to 1.08), after adding evidence-based medicine to the multivariable adjustments.

conclusionIn spite of an intense gender debate, focus on guideline adherence and the change in reperfusion strategy, the last decade gender differences in use of reperfusion therapy and evidence-based therapy at discharge did not decline during the study period, rather the opposite. Moreover, higher mortality in women persisted.

Identifiers

PMID22457480
PMCPMC3323814
OpenAlexW2116401239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.