Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27696318›Full record

ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2016

Statin Adherence: Does Gender Matter?

Karen M Goldstein, Leah L Zullig, Lori A Bastian, Hayden B Bosworth

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 70 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Monoclonal Anti-PCSK9 Antibodies: Real-World Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Challenges in Optimizing Lipid Management in Women.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2022
    Review
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.

Karen M GoldsteinCenter for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 508 Fulton Street, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. Karen.goldstein@duke.edu.
Leah L ZulligCenter for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 508 Fulton Street, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Lori A BastianPain Research, Informatics, Multimorbidities, and Education (PRIME) Center, VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, CT, USA.
Hayden B BosworthCenter for Health Services Research in Primary Care, Durham Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 508 Fulton Street, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.
Duke University · USYale University · US

Funding

HSRD VA IK2 HX001345
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewCardiovascular disease (CVD) continues to be the leading cause of death for men and women in the USA. Statins have contributed significantly to noted declines in cardiovascular-related mortality in the last decade; however, the benefit of statins is inequitable across genders. Women continue to be less likely to take statins and to meet target LDL goals than men. As a possible contributing factor to this disparity, we explore the evidence for gender-based differences in provision of, and adherence to statins. RECENT

findingsCompared with men, women are less likely to adhere to statins. Potential reasons for this gender difference in use of statins can be observed across all phases of adherence including both intentional and unintentional non-adherence. Notable gender-specific contributing factors for statin non-adherence include decreased provider and patient awareness of CVD risk among women, higher risk of statin intolerance among women, and competing demands associated with family caregiving responsibilities. Similar to limitations in the broader CVD literature, there is inadequate inclusion of gender-specific analyses in statin-related trials. Gender-based disparities in statin adherence can be linked to both provider level, psychosocial, and medication intolerance factors. Interventions designed to improve statin adherence should take gender-specific challenges into consideration such as women being older at the time of increased CVD risk, higher rates of statin intolerance, and potentially greater caregiving responsibilities.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsCardiovascular DiseasesHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMedication AdherenceHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsGenderMedication adherenceMedication persistenceStatin medications

Identifiers

PMID27696318
OpenAlexW2525232210

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
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.