Sex-Related Differences in Short-Term Prognosis in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction-Related Cardiogenic Shock Receiving Impella Support in Japan: From the J-PVAD Registry.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

1. Sex differences in treatments and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock: a systematic review and epidemiological meta-analysis.Critical care (London, England) · 2024
   Pooled it
2. Effect of enhanced external counterpulsation on the rehabilitation of patients with acute myocardial infarction after drug-coated balloon-based percutaneous coronary intervention.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025
   Trial
3. Shockingly Unequal: Addressing Sex-Specific Needs in Cardiogenic Shock.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2025
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as