ReviewEuropean heart journal2026
Cardiovascular disease in women: traditional and sex-specific risk factors.
Review in European heart journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Isometric handgrip training improves resting and absolute blood pressure during stress in hypertensive women: randomized controlled trial.Journal of human hypertension · 2026Trial
- Gaps and disparities in Lp(a) testing before universal screening: A 10-year analysis.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Article
- Review
- Evaluating a Preventive Heart Health Program for Women at Midlife: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Pilot Study.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Relative Leukocyte Telomere Length Is Associated with Multimorbidity Burden in Older Adults: Evidence for Sex-Specific Associations.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Endometriosis, subclinical cardiac remodeling, and cardiovascular risk: mechanistic insights from cardiac magnetic resonance and mediation analysis.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026Article
- Representation is Prevention: Closing the Sex Gap in Novel Cardiovascular Clinical Trials.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) accounts for more deaths in women than breast cancer, lung cancer and chronic lung disease combined, with a comparable mortality to that of men. Many women and physicians do not identify CVD as a major morbidity and mortality in women, resulting in significant delays in diagnosis and treatment. While advances have been made in the diagnosis, treatment and outcomes of CVD in women, there often remains insufficient evidence to guide effective, lifesaving care of women. This review of sex-specific and traditional CVD risk and risk-enhancing factors in women identifies areas of knowledge gaps to consider for investigation. A focus on the coronary vasculature reveals physiological differences of clinical relevance which can be interrogated. Inspection of and addressing disadvantage and gender bias in both the medical and lay communities should continue to be addressed. As CVD results from traditional risk factors and emerging risk-enhancing factors, a focus on the detection of preclinical cardiovascular disease may be of particular importance for women. Unique risk markers originate early in pre-menopausal women, as this is considered a healthy period of life. Awareness and implementation of the existing knowledge of sex-specific risk factors and sex-specific thresholds to educate women and physicians are needed. The anticipated life course of women supports a broadening focus on CVD toward that of lifelong care and emphasize key transitional stages for women-early risk factor onset, pregnancy, menopausal transition, and so on. This review is a call to action to re-envision a health system approach for lifespan prevention, detection, and treatment pathways to reduce CVD risk in women.
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.