ArticleCardiovascular diabetology2024
Sex inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors and their management in primary prevention in adults living with type 1 diabetes in Germany and France: findings from DPV and SFDT1.
Article in Cardiovascular diabetology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Statin prescription rates for prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in adults 40-75 years old with type 1 diabetes.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Predictors of Glycemic Control During the First 24 Months After Diagnosis of Type 1 Diabetes.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular risk prevention awareness and practices in type 2 diabetes: Linking HbA1c and lipid levels.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B targets - a SwissDiab study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Mapping sex-based multimorbidity networks in type 1 diabetes: a real-world study from Shanghai.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Association of Sex and Other Demographic Characteristics with Hemoglobin A1c in Older Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: Cross-sectional analysis of the U.S. Premier Healthcare Database.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Beyond overweight, visceral adiposity is associated with estimation of cardiovascular risk in patients living with type 1 diabetes: findings from the SFDT1 cohort.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Article
- Cardiovascular disease in women with type 1 diabetes: a narrative review and insights from a population-based cohort analysis.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2025Review
- Clinical Characteristics and Development of Complications Differ Between Adult-Onset and Child-Adolescent-Onset Type 1 Diabetes: A Report From a Tertiary Medical Center in Türkiye.Journal of diabetes research · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION &
objectivesTo evaluate whether cardiovascular risk factors and their management differ in primary prevention between adult males and females with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in two European countries in 2020-2022 and sex inequalities in achievement of standards of care in diabetes.
methodsWe used 2020-2022 data of patients without a cardiovascular history in the Prospective Diabetes Follow-up registry (DPV) centres, in Germany, and the Société Francophone du Diabète- Cohorte Diabète de Type 1 cohort (SFDT1), in France.
resultsWe included 2,657 participants from the DPV registry and 1,172 from the SFDT1 study. Body mass indexes were similar in females and males with similar proportions of HbA1c < 7% (DPV: 36.6 vs 33.0%, p = 0.06, respectively; SFDT1: 23.4 vs 25.7%, p = 0.41). Females were less overweight compared to men in DPV (55.4 vs 61.0%, p < 0.01) but not in SFDT1 (48.0 vs 44.9%, p = 0.33) and were less prone to smoke (DPV: 19.7 vs 25.8%, p < 0.01; SFDT1: 21.0 vs 26.0%, p = 0.07). Systolic blood pressure was lower in females than males with a higher rate of antihypertensive therapy in case of hypertension in females in DPV (70.5 vs 63.7%, p = 0.02) but not in SFDT1 (73.3 vs 68.6%, p = 0.64). In the case of microalbuminuria, ACEi-ARB were less often prescribed in women than men in DPV (21.4 vs 37.6%, p < 0.01) but not SFDT1 (73.3 vs 67.5.0%, p = 0.43). In females compared to males, HDL-cholesterol levels were higher; triglycerides were lower in both countries. In those with LDL-cholesterol > 3.4 mmol/L (DPV: 19.9 (females) vs 23.9% (males), p = 0.01; SFDT1 17.0 vs 19.2%, p = 0.43), statin therapy was less often prescribed in females than males in DPV (7.9 vs 17.0%, p < 0.01), SFDT1 (18.2 vs 21.0%, p = 0.42).
conclusionIn both studies, females in primary prevention have a better cardiovascular risk profile than males. We observed a high rate of therapeutic inertia, which might be higher in females for statin treatment and nephroprotection with ACEi-ARB, especially in Germany. Diabetologists should be aware of sex-specific differences in the management of cardiorenal risk factors to develop more personalized prevention strategies.
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.