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 OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
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