Abstract 207: Gender Differences in Pre-Event Health Status of Young Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the VIRGO Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Young women have a worse prognosis following acute myocardial infarction (AMI) then young men. Health status (symptoms, functioning and quality of life) prior to an AMI has received little attention and the pre-existing health status of young women presenting with an AMI, as compared with men, is unknown. Methods: VIRGO is a prospective observational study that enrolled 3,501 AMI patients (67% women) aged ≤55 years from the US and Spain. Clinical information was abstracted from medical records and health status data was collected through interviews at the time of the AMI [the Short Form 12 (SF-12), the EuroQol (EQ-5D) and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)]. To compare women and men, we used t-test/chi-square analyses and multivariable linear/logistic regression analysis, sequentially adjusting for socio-demographic, and co-morbidities, to identify clinical factors associated with patients’ health status. Results: Women were more likely to present with diabetes (39% vs. 27%), obesity (51% vs. 45%), stroke (5% vs. 2%), renal dysfunction (12% vs. 8%), lung disease (13% vs. 5%) and depression (48% vs. 24%; P<0.0001 for all). Prior to the event, women reported significantly worse general health scores (SF-12 physical summary score= 43±12 vs. 46±11, mental summary score= 44±13 vs. 48±11 and EQ-5D visual analog scale= 63±22 vs. 67±20, p<0.001 for all), more angina (SAQ angina frequency=83±22 vs. 87±18, p<0.001), poorer physical function (SAQ physical limitation=78±27 vs. 87±21, p<0.0001) and worse quality of life (SAQ QoL= 55±25 vs. 60±22, P<0.0001). Following adjustment for clinical covariates, female gender was independently associated with an increased odds of having more physical limitations due to angina (SAQ PL: OR=1.29, 95% CI 1.09,1.53, P=0.0025) poorer quality of life (SAQ QOL: β=-3.19; SE=0.89, P=0.0004); worse physical (SF-12: -1.04; 0.42, P=0.0136) and mental function (SF-12: -2.07; 0.46, P<0.0001). Conclusion: Young women with an AMI have poorer health status prior to their event than men. This suggests worse symptom control prior to an AMI and underscores the need to adjust for baseline health status in evaluations of gender-based disparities in young AMI patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".