ReviewUS cardiology2023
Sex and Gender Differences in Cardiovascular Disease: A Review of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection.
Review in US cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence, Predictors, and Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Arterial Dissection in Patients with Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Sex as a biological variable in nonclinical studies: Bridging scientific rigor, animal welfare, and regulatory expectations.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2026Review
- Recurrent Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection as the Cause of Repeated Myocardial Infarctions.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review highlights sex- and gender-specific considerations in cardiovascular diseases with a particular focus on pathophysiology, epidemiology, clinical presentation, risk factors, diagnosis, and management of spontaneous coronary artery dissection. It aims to summarize the most up to date evidence and gaps in knowledge that exist in the spontaneous coronary artery dissection space while highlighting salient points with regards to sex- and gender-based differences in clinical implications, current management, and recommended counseling practices.
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.