ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Men's more frequent predisposing factors in infectious endocarditis facilitate improvement of outcomes by shortening of diagnostic delay.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Endocarditis: Rising Incidence in the Post-COVID-19 Pandemic Era: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Sex Differences in Clinical Outcomes and Surgical Interventions for Infective Endocarditis: A Nationwide Registry.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Transthoracic Echocardiography in Assessing Patients with Suspected Infective Endocarditis (TEASE): An Exploratory Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Despite growing evidence for sex-specific differences in cardiovascular disease, sex is poorly considered in the management of infectious endocarditis (IE). Purpose: This study aimed to assess sex-specific aspects in diagnosing IE. Methods: All consecutive patients admitted at Ulm University Heart Center with suspected IE between 2009 and 2019 were included. IE was diagnosed using the Duke criteria. Risk factors, clinical presentation and in-hospital outcomes along with the impact of diagnostic delay were compared between male and female patients. Results: IE was diagnosed in 96 of 118 men (81.4%) and 33 of 45 women (73.3%) ( Conclusion: Men with suspected IE are younger, have more predisposing factors and experience a more complicated course of disease, while benefiting from early diagnosis. Therefore, recognizing the heightened risk profile specific to men during diagnosis can help to address their poorer prognosis.
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.