The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Differences in electrocardiographic response to exercise of women and men: a non-Bayesian factor.
Open accessAbstract
We evaluated the ability of ST-segment analysis during submaximal exercise tolerance testing (85% predicted age-adjusted heart rate) to diagnose the presence of significant coronary artery stenosis (2 75% cross sectional area narrowing) in a group of 85 men and 92 women with chest pain syndromes and no previously documented myocardial infarctions.Disease prevalence by selective coronary angiography was 36% for men and 33% for women (NS).Predictive value of a positive exercise test (PV(+ET)) as defined by 1 mm ST-segment depression 0.08 second after the J point was significantly higher for men than for women (77% vs 47%, p < 0.05).Predictive value of a negative test (PV(-ET)) was not significantly different for men (81%) and women (78%).Analysis of the 66 men and 66 women not taking digitalis preparations again showed that PV(+ET) was significantly higher for men than for women (90% vs 45%, p < 0.01).Multivariate analysis showed that patients with angiographically significant coronary disease had significantly lower attained heart rates and shorter exercise duration than those without significant stenosis, independent of ST-segment responses.A discriminant function using ST-segment response, attained heart rate and a sex-dependent ST-segment response factor was developed.Duration of exercise was not an independent predictor by our analysis.This function improved the PV(+ET) and PV(-ET) for the total group and for the women; for men, the PV(-ET) improved, while the PV(+ET) fell slightly.This function has not yet been used prospectively.In patients with chest pain and no previously documented myocardial infarction, men have a significantly higher PV( + ET) than women, which cannot be accounted for simply by a difference in disease prevalence (i.e., Bayes' theorem).EXERCISE TESTING has been a commonly used tool for the evaluation of cardiac status for over 20 years.Despite its extensive use as a screening test for asymptomatic patients, a diagnostic test for patients with symptoms of ischemic heart disease, and as a functional test for patients with known cardiac disease, the usefulness, accuracy, and even basic methods for interpretation of the test remain controversial.Proper use of any test involves definition of the patient populations in which the diagnostic yield will be greatest.The use of exercise testing for diagnosis of coronary atherosclerotic heart disease in women with chest pain has also been controversial.Some authors'-5 have found that women have a higher rate of-false-positive exercise tests than men, while others6 feel that there is no difference between the sexes in the exercise electrocardiographic response.We examined the electrocardiographic response to exercise of symp- tomatic men and women with regard to the diagnosis of coronary atherosclerotic heart disease.Methods Study GroupThe records of the cardiac catheterization and cardiac function laboratories at Grady Memorial
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cardiovascular Disease in Women
Stock, E. O., & Redberg, R. (2012) · Current Problems in Cardiology · doi:10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2012.07.001 · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Barolsky, S. M., Gilbert, C. A., Faruqui, A., Nutter, D. O., & Schlant, R. C.
- Venue
- Circulation
- Published
- 1979-11
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1021-1027
- ISSN
- 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
- 1524-4539
- OpenAlex
- W2089715405
- Cited by
- 167
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Differences in electrocardiographic response to exercise of women and men: a non-Bayesian factor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.60.5.1021
- The paper
- Barolsky, S. M., Gilbert, C. A., Faruqui, A., Nutter, D. O., & Schlant, R. C. (1979). Differences in electrocardiographic response to exercise of women and men: a non-Bayesian factor. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.60.5.1021
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.