ReviewCurrent atherosclerosis reports2025
How Can We Reduce Cardiovascular Risk in Women and Improve Risk Stratification?
Review in Current atherosclerosis reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewTo explore sex-specific dimensions of cardiovascular disease (CVD) by addressing key questions: (1) What is the true burden of CVD in women, and how does it compare with that in men across diverse populations? (2) Do risk factors for CVD differ between sexes in prevalence, biological impact, and prognostic significance? (3) Should we adopt sex-specific cardiovascular risk stratification tools to improve diagnostic precision in women? (4) Is there a need for earlier or more aggressive preventive strategies in women, particularly for those with sex-specific or predominant risk factors? RECENT
findingsCVD remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among women worldwide. Despite advances in care, significant sex-based disparities persist in awareness, diagnosis, risk stratification, and treatment. Women often present with distinct biological and psychosocial risk factors that are underrecognized in standard assessments. Emerging data support the development of sex-specific tools and earlier interventions tailored to these differences. This review highlights the need for a more nuanced, sex-sensitive approach to CVD prevention and management. By reevaluating traditional risk frameworks and incorporating female-specific and underrecognized contributors, there is potential to improve outcomes and close the persistent care gap for women.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40828301What 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.