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

被引:108
作者
Woodward, Mark [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ New South Wales, George Inst Global Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Univ Oxford, George Inst Global Hlth, Oxford, England
[3] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Epidemiol, Baltimore, MD 21218 USA
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
epidemiology; medical education; statistics and study design; meta-analysis; RISK-FACTOR; 64; COHORTS; METAANALYSIS; INDIVIDUALS; MEN; STROKE;
D O I
10.1136/heartjnl-2019-315299
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:1701 / 1708
页数:8
相关论文
共 24 条
[1]   Sex Differences in Ischemic Heart Disease Advances, Obstacles, and Next Steps [J].
Aggarwal, Niti R. ;
Patel, Hena N. ;
Mehta, Laxmi S. ;
Sanghani, Rupa M. ;
Lundberg, Gina P. ;
Lewis, Sandra J. ;
Mendelson, Marla A. ;
Wood, Malissa J. ;
Volgman, Annabelle S. ;
Mieres, Jennifer H. .
CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR QUALITY AND OUTCOMES, 2018, 11 (02)
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2014, EPIDEMIOLOGY STUDY D
[3]  
Bailey KR, 2007, MAYO CLIN PROC, V82, P158
[4]   A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies [J].
Bax, Leon ;
Yu, Ly-Mee ;
Ikeda, Noriaki ;
Moons, Karel G. M. .
BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2007, 7 (1)
[5]   Studying both sexes: a guiding principle for biomedicine [J].
Clayton, Janine Austin .
FASEB JOURNAL, 2016, 30 (02) :519-524
[6]   Sex differences in adverse drug reactions reported to the National Pharmacovigilance Centre in the Netherlands: An explorative observational study [J].
de Vries, Sieta T. ;
Denig, Petra ;
Ekhart, Corine ;
Burgers, Jako S. ;
Eefstra, Nanno K. ;
Mol, Peter G. M. ;
van Puijenbroek, Eugene P. .
BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY, 2019, 85 (07) :1507-1515
[7]   Sex and Gender Equity in Research: rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use [J].
Shirin Heidari ;
Thomas F. Babor ;
Paola De Castro ;
Sera Tort ;
Mirjam Curno .
Research Integrity and Peer Review, 1 (1)
[8]   Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis [J].
Higgins, JPT ;
Thompson, SG .
STATISTICS IN MEDICINE, 2002, 21 (11) :1539-1558
[9]   Graphics and Statistics for Cardiology: Data visualisation for meta-analysis [J].
Kiran, Amit ;
Crespillo, Abel Perez ;
Rahimi, Kazem .
HEART, 2017, 103 (01) :19-23
[10]   Meta-Analysis Impact of Drug Class on Adherence to Antihypertensives [J].
Kronish, Ian M. ;
Woodward, Mark ;
Sergie, Ziad ;
Ogedegbe, Gbenga ;
Falzon, Louise ;
Mann, Devin M. .
CIRCULATION, 2011, 123 (15) :1611-U92