Disparities in ST-elevation myocardial infarction management for the young goose and young gander: clinical, organizational, and educational challenges.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Sex-based differences in quality of care and outcomes in a health system using a standardized STEMI protocol.American heart journal · 2017
   Article
2. Outcomes of Women and Men With Acute Coronary Syndrome Treated With and Without Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017
   Article
3. Prevalence and risk factors of premature coronary artery disease in patients undergoing coronary angiography in Kurdistan, Iraq.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2015
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Sex differences in reperfusion in young patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: results from the VIRGO study.2015

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as