ArticleLipids in health and disease2018
Sex disparity in the management and outcomes of dyslipidemia of diabetic patients in the Arabian Gulf: findings from the CEPHEUS study.
Article in Lipids in health and disease, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence, knowledge, and lifestyle-associated risk factors of dyslipidemia among Ghanaian type-2 diabetes mellitus patients in rural and urban areas: A multicenter cross-sectional study.Health science reports · 2023Article
- Sex-Related Differences in the Pharmacological Response in SARS-CoV-2 Infection, Dyslipidemia, and Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Dyslipidemia: A Trigger for Coronary Heart Disease in Romanian Patients with Diabetes.Metabolites · 2020Article
- Impact of the 2019 European Guidelines on Diabetes in Clinical Practice: Real and Simulated Analyses of Lipid Goals.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about sex gap in the management and outcomes of dyslipidemia among diabetics in the Arabian Gulf. The aim if this study was to determine sex differences in the management and outcomes of dyslipidemia in diabetic patients in the Arabian Gulf.
methodsThis study was derived from the Centralized Pan-Middle-East Survey on the management of hypercholesterolemia. Patients recruited were aged ≥18 years on lipid lowering drugs for ≥3 months (stable medication for ≥6 weeks). Outcomes were based on the joint Consensus Statement of the American Diabetes Association and American College of Cardiology Foundation. Analyses were performed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression techniques.
resultsThe mean age of the cohort (n = 3336) was 57 ± 11 years and 45% (n = 1486) were females. Females were less likely to be on rosuvastatin (7.6% vs 12%; P < 0.001), atorvastatin (41% vs 46%; P = 0.005) and combination hypolipidemic therapy (5.6% vs 2.8%; P < 0.001) but more likely to be on simvastatin (51% vs 39%; P < 0.001) than males. Females, especially those with very high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk status, were also less likely to achieve LDL-cholesterol [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.58; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.40-0.86; P = 0.006], non-HDL-cholesterol [aOR, 0.68; 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.048] and apolipoprotein B [aOR, 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44-0.92; P = 0.016] lipid targets.
conclusionsDiabetic women were less likely to be on optimal hypolipemic therapy and consequently less likely to attain lipid goals compared to men. This shows a sex gap on dyslipidemia treatment in the region. Diabetic women with very high ASCVD risk status need to be aggressively treated to lower their risk of cardiovascular events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.