Patient perspectives on priorities for research on conventional and sex- and gender-related cardiovascular risk factors.
Cardiovascular risk factors
Gender differences
Patient participation
Prevention
Research priorities
Sex differences
Journal
Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation
ISSN: 1568-5888
Titre abrégé: Neth Heart J
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101095458
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2020
Dec 2020
Historique:
accepted:
15
07
2020
pubmed:
8
10
2020
medline:
8
10
2020
entrez:
7
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Recently, cardiovascular disease (CVD) research has focused on sex- and gender-related cardiovascular risk factors, in addition to conventional risk factors. This raises the question which factors are perceived by the target group (patients with CVD) as priorities for further research. We carried out a survey to study priority setting for more research into conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors according to 980 men and women with CVD or those at increased risk of CVD in the Netherlands. Data on conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors were descriptively analysed, stratified by gender group. The most frequently prioritised conventional factors according to men were heritability, overweight and unhealthy diet, while women most frequently listed stress, heritability and hypertension. The most frequently prioritised sex- and gender-related risk factors were depression or depressive feelings, migraine and having many caretaking responsibilities (men), and pregnancy complications, contraceptive pill use and early age at menopause (women). New research on sex- and gender-related risk factors was perceived roughly as relevant as that on conventional factors by men (mean 7.4 and 8.3 on a 1-10 scale, respectively) and women (8.2 and 8.6, respectively). Ethnic and gender minority groups placed more emphasis on risk factors related to sociocultural aspects (gender) than the majority group. Men and women with CVD or those at increased risk of CVD perceived new research on conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors as a priority. These findings may guide researchers and funders in further prioritising new CVD research.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Recently, cardiovascular disease (CVD) research has focused on sex- and gender-related cardiovascular risk factors, in addition to conventional risk factors. This raises the question which factors are perceived by the target group (patients with CVD) as priorities for further research.
METHODS
METHODS
We carried out a survey to study priority setting for more research into conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors according to 980 men and women with CVD or those at increased risk of CVD in the Netherlands. Data on conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors were descriptively analysed, stratified by gender group.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The most frequently prioritised conventional factors according to men were heritability, overweight and unhealthy diet, while women most frequently listed stress, heritability and hypertension. The most frequently prioritised sex- and gender-related risk factors were depression or depressive feelings, migraine and having many caretaking responsibilities (men), and pregnancy complications, contraceptive pill use and early age at menopause (women). New research on sex- and gender-related risk factors was perceived roughly as relevant as that on conventional factors by men (mean 7.4 and 8.3 on a 1-10 scale, respectively) and women (8.2 and 8.6, respectively). Ethnic and gender minority groups placed more emphasis on risk factors related to sociocultural aspects (gender) than the majority group.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Men and women with CVD or those at increased risk of CVD perceived new research on conventional and sex- and gender-related risk factors as a priority. These findings may guide researchers and funders in further prioritising new CVD research.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33025404
doi: 10.1007/s12471-020-01497-9
pii: 10.1007/s12471-020-01497-9
pmc: PMC7683649
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
656-661Références
J Psychosom Res. 2017 Sep;100:83-88
pubmed: 28720250
Maturitas. 2016 Nov;93:58-64
pubmed: 27338977
Eur Heart J. 2016 Aug 1;37(29):2315-2381
pubmed: 27222591
Eur J Neurol. 2015 Jun;22(6):1001-11
pubmed: 25808832
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016 Jan 19;67(2):127-135
pubmed: 26791057
Ethn Health. 2009 Jun;14(3):255-69
pubmed: 19052941
Climacteric. 2016 Aug;19(4):329-36
pubmed: 27327421
Clin Sci (Lond). 2016 Jul 1;130(14):1147-63
pubmed: 27252402
BMJ. 1998 Feb 7;316(7129):463-6
pubmed: 9492683
Am J Public Health. 2012 Jul;102(7):1267-73
pubmed: 22594719
Diabetologia. 2014 Aug;57(8):1542-51
pubmed: 24859435
Atherosclerosis. 2015 Jul;241(1):211-8
pubmed: 25670232
BMJ. 2014 Nov 17;349:g5992
pubmed: 25403476
Circulation. 2011 Nov 8;124(19):2145-54
pubmed: 22064958
Circulation. 2013 Feb 12;127(6):681-90
pubmed: 23401113
Psychosom Med. 2015 Jun;77(5):517-26
pubmed: 25984818
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2015 Feb;22(2):180-8
pubmed: 24008315
Int J Health Serv. 2014;44(4):643-710
pubmed: 25626224
Mayo Clin Proc. 2018 Jan;93(1):83-100
pubmed: 29275030
Eur J Public Health. 2014 Aug;24(4):600-5
pubmed: 24043131
Health Expect. 2014 Oct;17(5):637-50
pubmed: 22809132
Neth J Med. 2014 Jan;72(1):20-7
pubmed: 24457435
Stroke. 2014 Nov;45(11):3236-42
pubmed: 25270628
Int J Equity Health. 2016 May 28;15:82
pubmed: 27233478
Maturitas. 2010 Feb;65(2):149-60
pubmed: 19897327
Heart. 2018 Dec;104(23):1937-1948
pubmed: 29921571