Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34993430›Full record

ArticleCJC open2021

Trends of Sex Differences in Clinical Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction in the United States.

Andrija Matetic, Warkaa Shamkhani, Muhammad Rashid, Annabelle Santos Volgman, Harriette G C Van Spall, Thais Coutinho, Laxmi S Mehta, Garima Sharma, Purvi Parwani, Mohamed Osama Mohamed and 1 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CJC open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05619601 (Gender Differences in Prevention Strategies and Therapeutic Adherence After Acute Myocardial Infarction - GENAMI PREVENTION), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05619601 completednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Gender Differences in Prevention Strategies and Therapeutic Adherence After Acute Myocardial Infarction - GENAMI PREVENTION

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorSpanish Society of CardiologyRan2023 to 2026Enrolled530ConditionsGender Differences, Adherence, Medication, Therapeutic Adherence, Type 1 Acute Myocardial Infarction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Saving women's hearts: Improving outcomes with prevention & policy.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors.

Andrija MateticDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital of Split, Split, Croatia.
Warkaa ShamkhaniKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institutes of Applied Clinical Science and Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom.
Muhammad RashidKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institutes of Applied Clinical Science and Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom.
Annabelle Santos VolgmanDivision of Cardiology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Harriette G C Van SpallDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Thais CoutinhoCiccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Division of Cardiology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Laxmi S MehtaLoma Linda University, Loma Linda, California, USA.
Garima SharmaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Purvi ParwaniPopulation Health Research Institute, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Mohamed Osama MohamedKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institutes of Applied Clinical Science and Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom.
Mamas A MamasKeele Cardiovascular Research Group, Centre for Prognosis Research, Institutes of Applied Clinical Science and Primary Care and Health Sciences, Keele University, Keele, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFemale patients have been shown to experience worse clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) compared with male patients. However, it is unclear what trend these differences followed over time.

methodsData from patients hospitalized with AMI between 2004 and 2015 in the National Inpatient Sample were retrospectively analyzed, stratified according to sex. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of invasive management and in-hospital outcomes according to sex. The Mantel-Haenszel extension of the χ

resultsOf 7,026,432 AMI hospitalizations, 39.7% (n = 2,789,494) were women. Overall, women were older (median: 77 vs 70 years), with a higher prevalence of risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and depression. Women were less likely to receive coronary angiography (aOR, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.93) and percutaneous coronary intervention (aOR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.81-0.83) compared with men. Odds of all-cause mortality were higher in women (aOR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04;

conclusionsIn this temporal analysis of AMI hospitalizations over 12 years, we showed lower receipt of invasive therapies and higher mortality rates in women, with no change in temporal trends. There needs to be a systematic and consistent effort toward exploring these disparities to identify strategies to mitigate them.

Identifiers

PMID34993430
PMCPMC8712599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.