MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4410411615 · doi:10.1161/jaha.124.038463

Sex‐Associated Disparities in Surgical and Percutaneous Management of Aortic Stenosis With Severe Features: Retrospective Analysis From the National Readmission Database

2025· article· en· W4410411615 on OpenAlexaff
Gianluca Castaldi, Andrija Matetić, Rodrigo Bagur, J. Dawn Abbott, Mirvat Alasnag, Alaide Chieffo, Harindra C. Wijeysundera, Mamas A. Mamas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiogenic shockInternal medicineAortic valve replacementOdds ratioCardiologyStenosisPercutaneous coronary interventionRetrospective cohort studyAortic valve stenosisMyocardial infarctionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Referral for valve intervention for severe aortic stenosis (AS) may exhibit sex‐associated disparities independent of the growth of transcatheter interventions. This study aimed to determine whether there were sex‐associated differences in the use of aortic valve replacement (AVR), either surgical or transcatheter, in patients with aortic stenosis and severe features from a national cohort of patients. Methods Using the National Readmission Database, all patients with an index diagnosis of AS between January 2015 and December 2019 were included and stratified by their 90‐day readmission status and sex. AS with severe features was defined as the combination of primary‐ or secondary‐coded diagnosis of AS in combination with heart failure, syncope, angina pectoris, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock. A 1:1 nested case–control matching was performed to account for competing risk. The main investigated outcome was the sex‐associated rate of AVR in the 90 days after index hospitalization. Results A total of 31 712 matched weighted discharges were included in the analysis, 16 597 men (52.3%) and 15 116 women (47.7%). At 90 days, the rate of AVR was significantly lower in women (45.7% versus 53.6%, P <0.001) with significant difference for both surgical ( P <0.001) and transcatheter ( P =0.010) interventions. After multivariable adjustment, these differences persisted with women significantly less likely to receive AVR (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.63–0.71], P <0.001), either surgical AVR (aOR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.43–0.54], P <0.001) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (aOR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.75–0.84], P <0.001). Conclusions The use of surgical AVR and transcatheter aortic valve implantation was significantly lower in female patients with AS and severe features independent from patient‐ and hospital‐level characteristics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→