Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 654

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry

Open access
Steg, Ph Gabriel, Greenlaw, Nicola, Tardif, Jean-Claude, Tendera, Michal, Ford, Ian, Kääb, Stefan, Abergel, Hélène, Fox, Kim M., Ferrari, Roberto, on behalf of the CLARIFY Registry Investigators·2012·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Men and women differ in terms of presentation and management in coronary artery disease (CAD). Whether these differences translate into different clinical outcomes in stable CAD is unclear. We analysed data from the international prospective CLARIFY registry to compare cardiovascular clinical outcomes in men and women with stable CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed 1-year outcomes in 30 977 outpatients with stable CAD [23 975 (77.4%) men; 7002 (22.6%) women]. Women were older than men, more likely to have hypertension and diabetes, and less likely to exercise or smoke. They had more frequent angina, but were less likely to have undergone diagnostic non-invasive testing or coronary angiography. Women received less optimized treatment for stable CAD. One-year outcomes were similar for men and women for the composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or stroke [adjusted rates 1.7 vs. 1.8%, respectively, odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.15]; all-cause death (adjusted 1.5 vs. 1.6%, OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.72-1.13); fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (adjusted 1.0 vs. 0.9%, OR: 0.81, 95 CI: 0.60-1.08); and cardiovascular death or non-fatal myocardial infarction (adjusted 1.4 vs. 1.4%, OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.70-1.12). Fewer women underwent revascularization (2.6 vs. 2.2%, OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93), although appropriateness was not analysed. CONCLUSION: The risk profiles of women and men with stable CAD differ substantially. However, 1-year outcomes were similar. Fewer women underwent revascularization. Further research is needed to better understand gender determinants of outcome and devise strategies to minimize bias in the management and treatment of women.

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 · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehs289

Cites

2 of 2 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

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 654

Metadata

Authors
Steg, P. G., Greenlaw, N., Tardif, J.-C., Tendera, M., Ford, I., Kääb, S., Abergel, H., Fox, K. M., Ferrari, R., & on behalf of the CLARIFY Registry Investigators
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2012-08-26
Volume
33
Issue
22
Pages
2831-2840
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
OpenAlex
W2148352532
Cited by
654
References
2
FWCI
96.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs289
The paper
Steg, P. G., Greenlaw, N., Tardif, J.-C., Tendera, M., Ford, I., Kääb, S., Abergel, H., Fox, K. M., Ferrari, R., & on behalf of the CLARIFY Registry Investigators. (2012). Women and men with stable coronary artery disease have similar clinical outcomes: insights from the international prospective CLARIFY registry. European Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehs289

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.