Observational studyClinical cardiology2018
Marital status and outcomes after myocardial infarction: Observations from the Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study (COAPT).
Observational study in Clinical cardiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in the impact of marital status on coronary artery disease outcomes in Korea.Coronary artery disease · 2025Observational
- A wide landscape of morbidity and mortality risk associated with marital status in 0.5 million Chinese men and women: a prospective cohort study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
- Gender Differences in the Social Determinants of the Long-term Prognosis for Severely Decompensated Acute Heart Failure in Patients over 75 Years of Age.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2019Article
- Marital status and outcomes after myocardial infarction: Observations from the Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study (COAPT).Clinical cardiology · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 11 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While divorced or living alone, patients with stable cardiovascular disease are at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular events. The importance of marital status following a myocardial infarction (MI) is less clear. We hypothesized that marital status may affect cardiovascular outcomes following MI. We analyzed outcomes among patients with MI who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention from the Canadian Observational Antiplatelet Study (COAPT). Marital status was categorized into 3 groups: married/common-law patients living together; never married; and divorced, separated, or widowed patients. Patients were followed for 15 months and our primary outcome was the occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as a composite of mortality, repeat acute MI, stroke, or urgent coronary revascularization. Multivariable logistic regression models were performed, with married/common-law patients living together considered the reference group. Among 2100 patients included in analyses, 1519 (72.3%) were married/common-law patients living together, 358 (17.1%) were separated/divorced/widowed, and 223 (10.6%) patients were never married. Dual antiplatelet therapy use after 15 months was similar across groups (75.4%, 77.8%, and 73.6%, respectively). The risk of MACE after 15 months was similar among married patients living together (12.7%; referent) compared with patients who were never married (13.9%; adjusted odds ratio: 1.09, 95% confidence interval: 0.58-2.07, P = 0.79) and patients separated/divorced/widowed (14.3%; adjusted odds ratio: 0.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.40-1.25, P = 0.23). Similarly, the risk of individual endpoints, including mortality, was similar across the 3 groups. Among patients stabilized following an MI, we found no association between marital status and 15-month outcomes.
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.