Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37775559›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2024

Sex-specific and ethnicity-specific differences in MINOCA.

Sarena La, John Beltrame, Rosanna Tavella

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

3 authors.

Sarena LaAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
John BeltrameAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4294-6510
Rosanna TavellaAdelaide Medical School, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. rosanna.tavella@adelaide.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-4869-465X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Suspected myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) has received increasing attention over the past decade. Given the heterogeneity in the mechanisms underlying acute myocardial infarction in the absence of obstructive coronary arteries, the syndrome of MINOCA is considered a working diagnosis that requires further investigation after diagnostic angiography studies have been performed, including coronary magnetic resonance angiography and functional angiography. Although once considered an infrequent and low-risk form of myocardial infarction, recent data have shown that the prognosis of MINOCA is not as benign as previously assumed. However, despite increasing awareness of the condition, many questions remain regarding the diagnosis, risk stratification and treatment of MINOCA. Women seem to be more susceptible to MINOCA, but studies on the sex-specific differences of the disease are scarce. Similarly, ethnicity-specific factors might explain discrepancies in the observed prevalence or underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of MINOCA but data are also scarce. Therefore, in this Review, we provide an update on the latest evidence available on the sex-specific and ethnicity-specific differences in the clinical features, pathophysiological mechanisms, treatment and prognosis of MINOCA.

Indexed as

Coronary Artery DiseaseMyocardial InfarctionCoronary AngiographyCoronary VesselsEthnicityFemaleHumansMaleMINOCARisk Factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.