This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

64/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Plain-language summary

Objective To examine whether there are sex differences in the characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes of patients with an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Design, setting: Cohort study; analysis of data collected prospectively by the CONCORDANCE acute coronary syndrome registry from 41 Australian hospitals between February 2009 and May 2016. Participants 2898 patients (2183 men, 715 women) with STEMI. Main outcome measures Rates of revascularisation (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], thrombolysis, coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), adjusted for GRACE risk score quartile. Secondary outcomes timely vascularisation rates; major adverse cardiac event rates; clinical outcomes and preventive treatments at discharge. Results The mean age of women with STEMI at presentation was 66.6 years (SD, 14.5 years), of men, 60.5 years (SD, 12.5 years). The proportions of women with hypertension, diabetes, prior stroke, chronic kidney disease, chronic heart failure, or dementia were larger than those of men; fewer women had histories of previous coronary artery disease or myocardial infarction, or of prior PCI or CABG. Women were less likely to have undergone coronary angiography (odds ratio, adjusted for GRACE score quartile [aOR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.69) or revascularisation (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.34-0.52); they were less likely to have received timely revascularisation (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.63-0.83) or primary PCI (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61-0.95). Six months after admission, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (aOR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.76-4.09) and mortality (aOR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.24-3.80) were higher for women. At discharge, significantly fewer women than men received β-blockers, statins, and referrals to cardiac rehabilitation. Conclusion Women with STEMI are less likely to receive invasive management, revascularisation, or preventive medication at discharge. The reasons for these persistent differences in care require investigation.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

APA 7th

Khan, E., Brieger, D., Amerena, J., Atherton, J. J., Chew, D. P., Farshid, A., et al. (2018). Differences in management and outcomes for men and women with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The Medical journal of Australia. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja17.01109

Vancouver

Khan E, Brieger D, Amerena J, Atherton JJ, Chew DP, Farshid A, et al. Differences in management and outcomes for men and women with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The Medical journal of Australia. 2018. doi:10.5694/mja17.01109. PMID: 30025513.

BibTeX

@article{khan2018-30025513,
  author  = {Khan, E. and Brieger, D. and Amerena, J. and Atherton, J. J. and Chew, D. P. and Farshid, A. and Ilton, M. and Juergens, C. P. and others},
  title   = {{Differences in management and outcomes for men and women with ST-elevation myocardial infarction}},
  journal = {The Medical journal of Australia},
  year    = {2018},
  doi     = {10.5694/mja17.01109},
  pmid    = {30025513},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.5694/mja17.01109}
}

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

How to read this study

Design: this is a follow-up (cohort) study. People are observed over time and not assigned to anything, so an association can reflect other differences between groups. Look at how long follow-up lasted, how many dropped out, and whether the authors adjusted for age, education and other health conditions.
Size: the record lists 2,898 participants. Ask whether that is enough for the question, and who they were.
Effect: the record gives no effect size, so the summary above cannot say how large any difference was.

What the evidence grade means here

This page is graded moderate. alzhub.org assigns the grade automatically from keywords in the abstract, not from reading the paper. Moderate means the abstract mentions a cohort, case-control or longitudinal design. It can add at most 5 of the 100 points in the study score, and it is a label about design, not a verdict on whether the findings are true.

New to reading papers? Six questions to ask of any Alzheimer’s study · how we score.

Key findings

Results The mean age of women with STEMI at presentation was 66.6 years (SD, 14.5 years), of men, 60.5 years (SD, 12.5 years).
At discharge, significantly fewer women than men received β-blockers, statins, and referrals to cardiac rehabilitation.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Treatments →

Study details

Study designcohort study
Participants2,898
Evidence strengthModerate

How this study scored 64/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a cohort study following people over time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multicenter collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Medical journal of Australia)
Journal's citation record	— / 4	No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design	7 / 12	A cohort study following people over time
Strength of evidence	3 / 5	Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	2 / 5	2018 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	3 / 4	2,898 participants
Effect reported	0 / 3	No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Studied in people	3 / 3	Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomized / blinded	0 / 2	No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited	— / 7	No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year	— / 5	No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year	— / 6	No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here	— / 6	Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited	— / 4	No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	— / 3	No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multicenter collaboration	— / 3	Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 30025513)
Free to read	0 / 2	Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points	37 / 58	Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 37 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100.
Total	64 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.

Related studies in Drug development from nearby years

Also tagged “myocardial-infarction”

2 studies in the library carry the topic tag “myocardial-infarction”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 2 tagged studies.

Studies sharing this one's topic tags

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →