ReviewViszeralmedizin2014
Applying the Gender Lens to Risk Factors and Outcome after Adult Cardiac Surgery.
Review in Viszeralmedizin, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a prediction model for early major adverse cardiovascular events in children undergoing surgical repair of supravalvular aortic stenosis.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Females at a Clear Disadvantage with Postoperative Myocardial Infarction Symptoms.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Article
- Article
- Sex-specific risk factors for early mortality and survival after surgery of acute aortic dissection type a: a retrospective observational study.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2020Observational
- Ischemia and reperfusion injury following cardioplegic arrest is attenuated by age and testosterone deficiency in male but not female mice.Biology of sex differences · 2019Article
- Gender differences in outcomes following isolated coronary artery bypass grafting: long-term results.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApplying the gender lens to risk factors and outcome after adult cardiac surgery is of major clinical interest, as the inclusion of sex and gender in research design and analysis may guarantee more comprehensive cardiovascular science and may consecutively result in a more effective surgical treatment as well as cost savings in cardiac surgery.
methodsWe have reviewed classical cardiovascular risk factors (diabetes, arterial hypertension, hyperlipidemia, smoking) according to a gender-based approach. Furthermore, we have examined comorbidities such as depression, renal insufficiency, and hormonal influences in regard to gender. Gender-sensitive economic aspects have been evaluated, surgical outcome has been analyzed, and cardiovascular research has been considered from a gender perspective.
resultsThe influence of typical risk factors and outcome after cardiac surgery has been evaluated from a gender perspective, and the gender-specific distribution of these risk factors is reported on. The named comorbidities are listed. Economic aspects demonstrated a gender gap. Outcome after coronary and valvular surgeries as well as after heart transplantation are displayed in this regard. Results after postoperative use of intra-aortic balloon pump are shown. Gender-related aspects of clinical and biomedical cardiosurgical research are reported.
conclusionsFemale gender has become an independent risk factor of survival after the majority of cardiosurgical procedures. Severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction independently predicts survival in men, whereas age does in females.
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.