Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women and men. Yet biological and social factors differ between the sexes, while the importance of CVD in women may be underestimated due to the higher age-specific rates in men and the historical bias towards the male model of CVD. Conse...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Heart (British Cardiac Society) 2019-11, Vol.105 (22), p.1701-1708
1. Verfasser: Woodward, Mark
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1708
container_issue 22
container_start_page 1701
container_title Heart (British Cardiac Society)
container_volume 105
creator Woodward, Mark
description Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women and men. Yet biological and social factors differ between the sexes, while the importance of CVD in women may be underestimated due to the higher age-specific rates in men and the historical bias towards the male model of CVD. Consequently, sex differences in risk factor associations with CVD occur, but these are not always recognised. This article argues that sex disaggregation should be the norm in CVD research, for both humanitarian and clinical reasons. A tutorial on how to design and analyse sex comparisons is provided, including ways of reducing bias and increasing efficiency. This is presented both in the context of analysing individual participant data from a single study and a meta-analysis of sex-specific summary data. Worked examples are provided for both types of research. Fifteen key recommendations are included, which should be considered when undertaking sex comparisons of CVD associations. Paramount among these is the need to estimate sex differences, as ratios of relative risks or differences in risk differences, rather than merely test them for statistical significance. Conversely, when there is no evidence of statistical or clinical significance of a sex difference, the conclusions from the research should not be sex-specific.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315299
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6855792</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2310732874</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b517t-ac3520788e1c15243434b7e5485b3abff695b660dd5f3c760c7eade070a8b7403</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU9LHTEUxUOpVGv7DUoZ6MbN1GQy-TObQhGtgiCUCu7CncwdzSMveU1mRL-9eT59rS5KySLJze8c7s0h5BOjXxnj8vAGIU2L4OuGsq7mTDRd94bssVbqdenqbTlzIWpJudol73NeUErbTst3ZJczrljLuz0CP2FyMYDHCsJQTfMUkwNfjTGVAvj77ML141PCVUzT-pbxrhrcOGLCYDFXLlQW0uDiLWQ7eyjKnKN1j875A9kZwWf8-LTvk8uT419Hp_X5xY-zo-_ndS-YmmqwXDRUaY3MlllaXlavULRa9Bz6cZSd6KWkwyBGbpWkViEMSBUF3auW8n3ybeO7mvslDhbDlMCbVXJLSPcmgjMvX4K7Mdfx1kgthOqaYnDwZJDi7xnzZJYuW_QeAsY5m6aRmlOphC7ol1foIs6pfFehOKOKN1q1hWo3lE0x54TjthlGzTpD85yhWWdoNhkW2ee_B9mKnkMrwOEG6JeL_7WkfxTbVv8peQD4RLsk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2310732874</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>PubMed Central(OpenAccess)</source><creator>Woodward, Mark</creator><creatorcontrib>Woodward, Mark</creatorcontrib><description>Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women and men. Yet biological and social factors differ between the sexes, while the importance of CVD in women may be underestimated due to the higher age-specific rates in men and the historical bias towards the male model of CVD. Consequently, sex differences in risk factor associations with CVD occur, but these are not always recognised. This article argues that sex disaggregation should be the norm in CVD research, for both humanitarian and clinical reasons. A tutorial on how to design and analyse sex comparisons is provided, including ways of reducing bias and increasing efficiency. This is presented both in the context of analysing individual participant data from a single study and a meta-analysis of sex-specific summary data. Worked examples are provided for both types of research. Fifteen key recommendations are included, which should be considered when undertaking sex comparisons of CVD associations. Paramount among these is the need to estimate sex differences, as ratios of relative risks or differences in risk differences, rather than merely test them for statistical significance. Conversely, when there is no evidence of statistical or clinical significance of a sex difference, the conclusions from the research should not be sex-specific.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1355-6037</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-201X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315299</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31371439</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Cardiovascular Society</publisher><subject>Cardiovascular disease ; Cardiovascular Diseases - epidemiology ; Cardiovascular Diseases - mortality ; Cardiovascular Diseases - physiopathology ; Comorbidity ; Epidemiology ; Female ; Gender differences ; Health Status Disparities ; Humans ; Male ; medical education ; Meta-analysis ; Prognosis ; Review ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Sex Characteristics ; Sex Factors ; statistics and study design ; Systematic review ; Womens health</subject><ispartof>Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2019-11, Vol.105 (22), p.1701-1708</ispartof><rights>Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.</rights><rights>2019 Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ . Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b517t-ac3520788e1c15243434b7e5485b3abff695b660dd5f3c760c7eade070a8b7403</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b517t-ac3520788e1c15243434b7e5485b3abff695b660dd5f3c760c7eade070a8b7403</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9800-5296</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6855792/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6855792/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31371439$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Woodward, Mark</creatorcontrib><title>Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations</title><title>Heart (British Cardiac Society)</title><addtitle>Heart</addtitle><addtitle>Heart</addtitle><description>Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women and men. Yet biological and social factors differ between the sexes, while the importance of CVD in women may be underestimated due to the higher age-specific rates in men and the historical bias towards the male model of CVD. Consequently, sex differences in risk factor associations with CVD occur, but these are not always recognised. This article argues that sex disaggregation should be the norm in CVD research, for both humanitarian and clinical reasons. A tutorial on how to design and analyse sex comparisons is provided, including ways of reducing bias and increasing efficiency. This is presented both in the context of analysing individual participant data from a single study and a meta-analysis of sex-specific summary data. Worked examples are provided for both types of research. Fifteen key recommendations are included, which should be considered when undertaking sex comparisons of CVD associations. Paramount among these is the need to estimate sex differences, as ratios of relative risks or differences in risk differences, rather than merely test them for statistical significance. Conversely, when there is no evidence of statistical or clinical significance of a sex difference, the conclusions from the research should not be sex-specific.</description><subject>Cardiovascular disease</subject><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases - epidemiology</subject><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases - mortality</subject><subject>Cardiovascular Diseases - physiopathology</subject><subject>Comorbidity</subject><subject>Epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gender differences</subject><subject>Health Status Disparities</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>medical education</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Prognosis</subject><subject>Review</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Sex Characteristics</subject><subject>Sex Factors</subject><subject>statistics and study design</subject><subject>Systematic review</subject><subject>Womens health</subject><issn>1355-6037</issn><issn>1468-201X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>9YT</sourceid><sourceid>ACMMV</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU9LHTEUxUOpVGv7DUoZ6MbN1GQy-TObQhGtgiCUCu7CncwdzSMveU1mRL-9eT59rS5KySLJze8c7s0h5BOjXxnj8vAGIU2L4OuGsq7mTDRd94bssVbqdenqbTlzIWpJudol73NeUErbTst3ZJczrljLuz0CP2FyMYDHCsJQTfMUkwNfjTGVAvj77ML141PCVUzT-pbxrhrcOGLCYDFXLlQW0uDiLWQ7eyjKnKN1j875A9kZwWf8-LTvk8uT419Hp_X5xY-zo-_ndS-YmmqwXDRUaY3MlllaXlavULRa9Bz6cZSd6KWkwyBGbpWkViEMSBUF3auW8n3ybeO7mvslDhbDlMCbVXJLSPcmgjMvX4K7Mdfx1kgthOqaYnDwZJDi7xnzZJYuW_QeAsY5m6aRmlOphC7ol1foIs6pfFehOKOKN1q1hWo3lE0x54TjthlGzTpD85yhWWdoNhkW2ee_B9mKnkMrwOEG6JeL_7WkfxTbVv8peQD4RLsk</recordid><startdate>20191101</startdate><enddate>20191101</enddate><creator>Woodward, Mark</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Cardiovascular Society</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><scope>9YT</scope><scope>ACMMV</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9800-5296</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20191101</creationdate><title>Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations</title><author>Woodward, Mark</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b517t-ac3520788e1c15243434b7e5485b3abff695b660dd5f3c760c7eade070a8b7403</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Cardiovascular disease</topic><topic>Cardiovascular Diseases - epidemiology</topic><topic>Cardiovascular Diseases - mortality</topic><topic>Cardiovascular Diseases - physiopathology</topic><topic>Comorbidity</topic><topic>Epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gender differences</topic><topic>Health Status Disparities</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>medical education</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Prognosis</topic><topic>Review</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Sex Characteristics</topic><topic>Sex Factors</topic><topic>statistics and study design</topic><topic>Systematic review</topic><topic>Womens health</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Woodward, Mark</creatorcontrib><collection>BMJ Open Access Journals</collection><collection>BMJ Journals:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Science Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Heart (British Cardiac Society)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Woodward, Mark</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations</atitle><jtitle>Heart (British Cardiac Society)</jtitle><stitle>Heart</stitle><addtitle>Heart</addtitle><date>2019-11-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>105</volume><issue>22</issue><spage>1701</spage><epage>1708</epage><pages>1701-1708</pages><issn>1355-6037</issn><eissn>1468-201X</eissn><abstract>Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in women and men. Yet biological and social factors differ between the sexes, while the importance of CVD in women may be underestimated due to the higher age-specific rates in men and the historical bias towards the male model of CVD. Consequently, sex differences in risk factor associations with CVD occur, but these are not always recognised. This article argues that sex disaggregation should be the norm in CVD research, for both humanitarian and clinical reasons. A tutorial on how to design and analyse sex comparisons is provided, including ways of reducing bias and increasing efficiency. This is presented both in the context of analysing individual participant data from a single study and a meta-analysis of sex-specific summary data. Worked examples are provided for both types of research. Fifteen key recommendations are included, which should be considered when undertaking sex comparisons of CVD associations. Paramount among these is the need to estimate sex differences, as ratios of relative risks or differences in risk differences, rather than merely test them for statistical significance. Conversely, when there is no evidence of statistical or clinical significance of a sex difference, the conclusions from the research should not be sex-specific.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd and British Cardiovascular Society</pub><pmid>31371439</pmid><doi>10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315299</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9800-5296</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1355-6037
ispartof Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2019-11, Vol.105 (22), p.1701-1708
issn 1355-6037
1468-201X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6855792
source MEDLINE; PubMed Central(OpenAccess)
subjects Cardiovascular disease
Cardiovascular Diseases - epidemiology
Cardiovascular Diseases - mortality
Cardiovascular Diseases - physiopathology
Comorbidity
Epidemiology
Female
Gender differences
Health Status Disparities
Humans
Male
medical education
Meta-analysis
Prognosis
Review
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Sex Characteristics
Sex Factors
statistics and study design
Systematic review
Womens health
title Rationale and tutorial for analysing and reporting sex differences in cardiovascular associations
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T07%3A30%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Rationale%20and%20tutorial%20for%20analysing%20and%20reporting%20sex%20differences%20in%20cardiovascular%20associations&rft.jtitle=Heart%20(British%20Cardiac%20Society)&rft.au=Woodward,%20Mark&rft.date=2019-11-01&rft.volume=105&rft.issue=22&rft.spage=1701&rft.epage=1708&rft.pages=1701-1708&rft.issn=1355-6037&rft.eissn=1468-201X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315299&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2310732874%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2310732874&rft_id=info:pmid/31371439&rfr_iscdi=true