Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 282

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Racial and Ethnic Differences in Time to Acute Reperfusion Therapy for Patients Hospitalized With Myocardial Infarction

Bradley, Elizabeth H.·2004·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Nonwhite patients experience significantly longer times to fibrinolytic therapy (door-to-drug times) and percutaneous coronary intervention (door-to-balloon times) than white patients, raising concerns of health care disparities, but the reasons for these patterns are poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: To estimate race/ethnicity differences in door-to-drug and door-to-balloon times for patients receiving primary reperfusion for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; to examine how sociodemographic factors, insurance status, clinical characteristics, and hospital features mediate racial/ethnic differences. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Retrospective, observational study using admission and treatment data from the National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI) for a US cohort of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or left bundle-branch block and receiving reperfusion therapy. Patients (73,032 receiving fibrinolytic therapy; 37,143 receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention) were admitted from January 1, 1999, through December 31, 2002, to hospitals participating in NRMI 3 and 4. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Minutes between hospital arrival and acute reperfusion therapy. RESULTS: Door-to-drug times were significantly longer for patients identified as African American/black (41.1 minutes), Hispanic (36.1 minutes), and Asian/Pacific Islander (37.4 minutes), compared with patients identified as white (33.8 minutes) (P<.01 for all). Door-to-balloon times for patients identified as African American/black (122.3 minutes) or Hispanic (114.8 minutes) were significantly longer than for patients identified as white (103.4 minutes) (P<.001 for both). Racial/ethnic differences were still significant but were substantially reduced after accounting for differences in mean times to treatment for the hospitals in which patients were treated; significant racial/ethnic differences persisted after further adjustment for sociodemographic characteristics, insurance status, and clinical and hospital characteristics (P<.01 for all). CONCLUSION: A substantial portion of the racial/ethnic disparity in time to treatment was accounted for by the specific hospital to which patients were admitted, in contrast to differential treatment by race/ethnicity inside the hospital.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.292.13.1563

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Bradley, E. H.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2004-10-06
Volume
292
Issue
13
Pages
1563
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2116134130
Cited by
282
References
1
FWCI
11.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.