ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Sex differences in outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
Abstract
objectiveGender is a vital factor for the development and treatment of cardiovascular diseases. This study aimed to evaluate sex-based differences in the prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
methodsAMI patients who had been registered in the MIMIC III and IV database were enrolled. The primary study endpoint was 1-year all-cause mortality. The secondary study endpoints were in-hospital all-cause mortality, 28-day all-cause mortality, in-hospital complications of acute kidney injury (AKI) and ventricular arrhythmias (VA). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess survival rate between the two groups. Cox proportional hazards regression and logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate whether gender is an independent predictor of prognosis of AMI patients.
resultsA total of 4890 patients with AMI were included. At 1-year follow-up, 722 (22.5%) men died and 558 (33.2%) women died, and after analysis and adjustment, men had a 17.9% lower risk of all-cause mortality compared to women [Hazard Ratio (HR) = 0.821, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.684-0.987]. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a higher 1-year survival rate in the male group compared with the female group (HR = 0.532, 95% CI: 0.444-0.638, log-rank P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in AKI during hospitalization. After adjusting for multivariable analysis, men with AMI had a 25% increased risk of hospitalization for VA compared to women [odds ratio (OR) = 1.250, 95% CI:1.030-1.518].
conclusionWomen had a higher 1-year mortality but a lower risk of ventricular arrhythmias (VA) during AMI compared to men. CLINICAL TRIAL APPROVAL STATEMENT: This Trial was registered in the Chinese clinical trials registry: ChiCTR1800014583. Registered 22 January 2018 ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/searchproj.aspx ).
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.