Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37711935›Full record

ReviewCureus2023

Analysis of Gender-Based Inequality in Cardiovascular Health: An Umbrella Review.

Jodie Bosomworth, Zahid Khan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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.

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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

2 authors.

Jodie BosomworthCardiac/Thoracic/Vascular Surgery, West Suffolk Community Cardiac Rehabilitation Team, West Suffolk NHS Foundation Trust, Suffolk, GBR.
Zahid KhanAcute Medicine, Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust, Southend on Sea, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This umbrella review aims to investigate possible gender-based inequality in cardiovascular health and improve understanding surrounding differing presentations seen in women. Searches of current literature were conducted using Medline; Cochrane; Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL Plus); and PubMed databases. Focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses from the last decade, searches were expanded to the publication year of 2000 onwards, to enable a broader review of current practices. Current clinical guidelines were also reviewed. 17 articles were deemed to satisfy the desired criteria and were therefore carried forward to be critically appraised. The articles reviewed were multifactorial; however, they can be grouped into four categories of common focus: risk factors, presentation, treatment, and current research. On critical analysis, 13 reoccurring themes were noted throughout the reviewed articles with each discussed in detail within this review. There is a need to prioritize women in cardiovascular health, through raising awareness, improving prevention (both primary and secondary), reducing delays in presentation, and increasing understanding and recognition of sex differences in symptom presentation, to enable improved diagnosis and treatment along with the standardization of gender-specific clinical guidance. The results are unanimous regarding an undeniable gender-based inequality in cardiovascular health to the detriment of women. With such damning evidence that women are under-represented and indeed undertreated, the time has come now to question whether women should be considered as their own specialty within cardiology and to ultimately raise awareness and ensure women are given the same consideration regarding cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment and treatment, in order to finally remove gender inequality in cardiovascular (CV) health. In order to reverse this disparity, it is clear from the included studies that further research is required to understand the sex differences seen in both the presentation and symptoms of CVD as well as to enable improved treatment of women and the development of sex-specific strategies and clinical guidance to empower clinicians moving forward.

Indexed as

an umbrella reviewcvd risk assessmentgender-based inequality in cardiovascular healthgender inequalities in treatmentpico formatpoor assessment / misdiagnosispost-menopauseprisma style flow chartscad and takotsubo cardiomyopathy.systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Identifiers

PMID37711935
PMCPMC10499465

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.