Sex-Related Disparities in Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Older Adults With Late-Onset Hypertension
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether sex-based differences in cardiovascular outcomes exist in late-onset hypertension. METHODS: This is a population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada of 266 273 adults, aged ≥66 years with newly diagnosed hypertension. We determined the incidence of the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (myocardial infarction, stroke, and congestive heart failure), all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular death by sex using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for demographic factors and comorbidities. RESULTS: The mean age of the total cohort was 74 years, and 135 531 (51%) were female. Over a median follow-up of 6.6 (4.7–9.0) years, females experienced a lower crude incidence rate (per 1000 person-years) than males for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (287.3 versus 311.7), death (238.4 versus 251.4), and cardiovascular death (395.7 versus 439.6), P <0.001. The risk of primary composite cardiovascular outcome was lower among females (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.73–0.76]; P <0.001) than in males. This was consistent after adjusting for the competing risk of all-cause death with a subdistributional hazard ratio, 0.88 ([95% CI, 0.86–0.91]; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Females had a lower risk of cardiovascular outcomes compared with males within a population characterized by advanced age and new hypertension. Our results highlight that the severity of outcomes is influenced by sex in relation to the age at which hypertension is diagnosed. Further studies are required to identify sex-specific variations in the diagnosis and management of late-onset hypertension due to its high incidence in this group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".