MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Evolution of Age and Female Representation in the Most-Cited Randomized Controlled Trials of Cardiology of the Last 20 Years

2018· article· en· W2807059176 on OpenAlexaff
Quôc Dinh Nguyên, Eric Peters, Andréanne Wassef, Philippe Desmarais, Delphine Rémillard-Labrosse, Maxime Tremblay‐Gravel

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité LavalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialPopulationAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseDemographySample size determinationDiabetes mellitusHeart failureCardiologyEndocrinologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Older adults and women have historically been underrepresented in randomized controlled trials of cardiology. Recent temporal evolution and factors influencing representation are incompletely investigated. We aimed to contrast age and female representation in the most influential randomized controlled trials in cardiology of the last 20 years to population prevalence and to assess the study factors affecting representation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using Web of Science, we selected the 25 most-cited cardiology articles each year between 1996 and 2015, and extracted mean age, percentage of women, funding source, sample size, disease condition, intervention type, and exclusion criteria. The outcomes were the evolution of the mean age and the percentage of women over time. Protocol design elements and year of publication were assessed as predictors of outcomes in multivariable regressions. A total of 500 studies were analyzed, where the mean age was 62.6±7.4 years and the median percentage of women was 28.6% (22.2-40.5). Compared with population prevalence derived from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2015-2016, gaps in representation were apparent and more pronounced for coronary artery disease (-5.0 years; -27.2% women) and heart failure (-6.0 years; -25.4% women). The mean age (0.15 year per year; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.26) and percentage of women (+0.29% per year; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.50), slightly but significantly increased over time. Private funding, small sample size, and exclusions pertaining to maximal age, atrial fibrillation, and diabetes mellitus were associated with a decreased mean age in multivariable linear regressions. Age and life expectancy exclusions were associated with lower female percentage. CONCLUSIONS: Although age and female representation increased over time, the modest trends are unlikely to resolve the persistently wide gaps with actual populational prevalence, especially for coronary artery disease and HF. Representation is modulated by the cardiovascular condition studied and some modifiable protocol elements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations56
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Cardiovascular Quality and OutcomesSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207