ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Sex Differences in Incidence and Outcome of Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Within a Local Health Network.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing the prognosis of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic: an analysis of the Utstein Registry in Aichi, Japan.BMC emergency medicine · 2026Observational
- Sex differences in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Sex and 30-day survival following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in Scotland 2011-2020.International journal of emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Association between sex and survival after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Sex and gender differences in presentation and characteristics of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) are established in cohorts with presumed cardiac aetiology but not non-cardiac etiology. This study investigated the effect of sex on incidence and outcome of OHCA according to presumed and adjudicated aetiology within a local health network. Methods: Population-based observational cohort study of emergency medical services (EMS) attended OHCAs within an Australian local health network. Cases identified from an EMS registry between 2012-2016 were linked to a hospital registry. Age-standardised incidence and baseline characteristics were stratified by sex for EMS-treated OHCA, non-EMS witnessed presumed cardiac and obvious non-cardiac sub-cohorts, and hospitalised cases. Logistic regression was used to explore the primary outcome of survival to hospital discharge. Results: We identified 2,024 EMS-attended and 780 EMS-treated OHCAs. The non-EMS witnessed sub-cohorts comprised 504 presumed cardiac and 168 obvious non-cardiac OHCAs. Adjudicated aetiology was recorded in 123 hospitalised cases. Age-standardised incidence for women was almost half that of men across all groups. Across cohorts, women were generally older and arrested with a non-shockable initial rhythm in an area of low socioeconomic status. There was no sex difference in the primary outcome for the main EMS-treated cohort or in the non-cardiac sub-cohorts. The sex difference in outcome in the presumed cardiac sub-cohort was not present after multivariable adjustment. Conclusions: There are sex differences in incidence and outcome of EMS-treated OHCA that appear to be driven by differences in susceptibility to cardiac arrhythmias and underlying etiology, rather than treatment delays or disparities.
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.