ReviewCJC open2024
Sex, Gender, and Women's Heart Health: How Women's Heart Programs Address the Knowledge Gap.
Review in CJC open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Protocol for Identifying Priorities for Women+ Health in the Maritime Provinces Using a Priority Setting Partnership Approach.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Gender disparities in coronary artery disease: a review of factors influencing clinical outcomes.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2025Review
- The Bidirectionality of Psychosocial Stress and Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Women; Recognition and Strategies for Management.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Societal, occupational, and economic considerations for women with (M)INOCA: a narrative review.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2025Review
- Unveiling the Longitudinal Journey: 3-Year Follow-up of Women with MINOCA and INOCA in a Specialized Heart Centre.CJC open · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article aims to bridge existing knowledge gaps that impact clinical cardiovascular care and outcomes for women in Canada. The authors discuss various aspects of women's heart health, emphasizing the efficacy of multidisciplinary care in promoting women's well-being. The article also identifies the impact of national women's heart health campaigns and the value of peer support in improving outcomes. The article addresses the particular risks that women face, such as pregnancy-related complications and hormone replacement therapy, all of which are associated with cardiovascular events, and highlights the differences in ischemic symptoms between men and women. Despite improvements in acute event outcomes, challenges persist in accessing timely ambulatory care, particularly for women. Canada has responded to these challenges by introducing Women Heart Programs, which offer tailored programs, support groups, and specialized testing. However, these programs remain few in number and are found only in urban settings. Overall, this review identifies sex and gender factors related to women's heart health, underscoring the importance of specialized programs and multidisciplinary care in improving women's cardiovascular health.
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.