ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne1995
Good judgement or sex bias in the referral of patients for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease? An exploratory study.
Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Randomized, controlled trial of an interactive videodisc decision aid for patients with ischemic heart disease.Journal of general internal medicine · 2000Trial
- The association of angina pectoris with heart disease mortality among men and women by diabetes status: the Rancho Bernardo Study.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2010Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo examine the sex-specific prevalence of referral to a cardiologist for noninvasive ischemic testing (NIIT) or angiography among outpatients with clinical suspicion of new coronary artery disease (CAD).
designRetrospective records-based cohort study.
settingGroup cardiology referral practice in a tertiary care teaching hospital in Toronto. PATIENTS: Of 1212 new patients referred between Mar. 1, 1991, and Mar. 31, 1993, 339 (232 men and 107 women) had symptoms of CAD and had initiation or modification of antianginal therapy, or were prescribed NIIT or angiography by their cardiologist. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of prior NIIT and of subsequent diagnostic procedures for women and men.
resultsWomen were less likely than men to have had prior NIIT (51 [47.7%] v. 162 [69.8%]) (p < 0.001). Women with class I or II angina were less likely than their male counterparts to have had prior NIIT (20/40 [50.0%] v. 84/109 [77.1%]) (p = 0.001); a similar difference was found between women and men with class III or IV angina (5/15 [33.3%] v. 43/60 [71.7%]) (p = 0.006). Men and women with atypical angina were equally likely to have had prior NIIT. Among patients with a positive initial NIIT result a higher proportion of women than of men did not have any further testing done by the cardiologist (53.5% v. 33.7%) (p = 0.02). Cardiologists referred a higher proportion of women (40.2%) than of men (25.4%) for NIIT (p = 0.006) and, for patients with a positive prior NIIT result, were also more likely to refer women (25.7% [9/43]) than men (12.0% [16/133]) for further NIIT (p = 0.04). Women with a positive prior NIIT result were more likely than their male counterparts to have a negative retest result (42.8% v. 18.2%). After adjustment for age, anginal class and overall result of NIIT, women were less likely than men to be referred for angiography (odds ratio 1.4), although the difference was not significant.
conclusionsIn this exploratory study sex-related differences in patterns of use of NIIT by cardiologists seem largely based on differences in testing before referral by family physicians and general internists.
Indexed as
Identifiers
7697580PMC1337760W1788729601What 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.