MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006826074 · doi:10.1161/jaha.119.015634

State of the Science in Women's Cardiovascular Disease: A Canadian Perspective on the Influence of Sex and Gender

2020· review· en· W3006826074 on OpenAlexaffabout
Colleen M. Norris, Cindy Ying Yin Yip, Kara Nerenberg, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Christine Pacheco, Heather J.A. Foulds, Marsha Hardy, Christine A. Gonsalves, Shahin Jaffer, Monica Parry, Tracey J. F. Colella, Abida Dhukai, Jasmine Grewal, Jennifer Price, Anna Levinsson, Donna Hart, Paula Harvey, Harriette G.C. Van Spall, Hope Sarfi, Tara Sedlak, Sofia B. Ahmed, Carolyn Baer, Thais Coutinho, Jodi D. Edwards, Courtney R. Green, Amy A. Kirkham, Kajenny Srivaratharajah, Sandra M. Dumanski, Lisa Keeping‐Burke, N. Lappa, Robert D. Reid, Helen Mary Robert, Graeme N. Smith, Michelle Martin‐Rhee, Sharon L. Mulvagh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsKingston Health Sciences CentreQueen's UniversityDalhousie UniversityUniversity of OttawaMoncton HospitalLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaVancouver Community CollegeB.C. Women's Hospital & Health CentreWomen's College HospitalUniversity of New BrunswickToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoMontreal Heart InstituteInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecCalgary General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcMaster UniversityLaurentian UniversityCanadian Heart Research CentreHeart and Stroke FoundationVancouver General HospitalUniversity of CalgaryUniversité de MontréalUniversity of SaskatchewanThe Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePerspective (graphical)DiseaseState (computer science)GerontologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of premature death for women in Canada. Although it has long been recognized that estrogen impacts vascular responses in women, there is emerging evidence that physiologic and pathophysiologic cardiovascular responses are uniquely affected across the spectrum of a woman's life. Despite a global understanding that manifestations and outcomes of CVD are known to differ between men and women, uptake of the recognition of sex and gender influences on the clinical care of women has been slow or absent.\n\nTo highlight the need for better research, diagnosis, treatment, awareness, and support of women with CVD in Canada, the Canadian Women's Heart Health Alliance (CWHHA), supported by the University of Ottawa Heart Institute, and in collaboration with the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada (HSFC), undertook a comprehensive review of the evidence on sex‐ and gender‐specific differences in comorbidities, risk factors, disease awareness, presentation, diagnosis, and treatment across the entire spectrum of CVD. The intent of this review was not to directly compare women and men on epidemiological and outcome measures of CVD, but to synthesize the state of the evidence for CVD in women and identify significant knowledge gaps that hinder the transformation to clinical practice and care that is truly tailored for women, a significant health challenge that has only been recognized in Canada relatively recently. This review highlights the scarcity of Canadian data on CVD in women as part of the ongoing struggle to increase awareness of and improve outcomes for women with CVD. Because of a paucity of published Canada‐specific evidence, the purpose of this review is to provide an infrastructure to summarize world‐wide published evidence, including knowledge gaps that must be understood to then make effective recommendations to alleviate the glaring “unders” of CVD for women in Canada: under‐aware, under‐diagnosed and under‐treated, under‐researched, and under‐support.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.011
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations183
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207