Overall picture.The coronary cardiac disorder (CHD) is a common disease and causes death among women, explaining more than 250.000 deaths among women per annum. During the two last decades, the important studies of multiple helped to define the precise clinical trials, the factors of risk, the preventive interventions, and the effective therapies for CHD. Unfortunately, several of these studies have the entirely excluded women or only the limited numbers included women and minorities. Thus, most of the obviousness supporting of the contemporary recommendations for the test, prevention, and the treatment of the coronary disease among women is extrapolated studies undertaken mainly at the men between two ages. The two best approaches to obtain the additional obviousness on the diagnosis and the treatment of CHD among women are to undertake the great studies which include with proportioned numbers of the women and the minorities to answer the question of research or to carry out systematic reviews and méta-analyses recapitulating the effect estimates by the sub-group.The agency for the search for care of health and quality (AHRQ) and the national institutes of the Office of health of research on the health of the women placed the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) - the center of practice Obviousness-based by Stanford (EPC) to review the obviousness concerning the prevention, the diagnosis, and the management of the coronary cardiac disorder among women and of the minorities. In a first phase of this work, UCSF-Stanford EPC led a preliminary examination obviously on 42 matters related to CHD among women, entitled results of systematic examination of research on the diagnosis and treatment of coronary cardiac disorder in Women.1 based on these reviews, we identified four principal questions for the review and méta-analyzes it systematic. The results of these four reviews are presented in this report/ratio.MethodologyWe carried out standardized research of the electronic data bases of the publications concerning the matter sectors. We developed specific limits of research for each of the four principal matters and undertook a separate research of the obviousness concerning each one. We also reviewed the bibliographies of the required articles and sought suggestions for the additional articles of our expert critics of par. For each matter sector, we established the clear criteria of inclusion which required that the studies provide data concerning the detail of question of research to the women.For three of the principal questions (, reduction diagnostic tests of lipids and diabetes not invading), two investigators of UCSF-Stanford EPC reviewed all the identified titles and excluded those which did not meet criteria of inclusion. The summaries of the remaining articles were reviewed by two investigators of doctor of UCSF-Stanford EPC, who independently classified acceptability. To complete text of the remaining eligible articles was reviewed independently by two investigators of doctor of UCSF-Stanford EPC employing the standardized forms of abstraction to classify acceptability, the quality of rate as Juste or good based on preset criteria, and the data abstract for eligible studies. For the principal question concerning the troponine, from the titles and the summaries were reviewed by an investigator of UCSF-Stanford EPC. Data were withdrawn of each eligible article by two critical independent and seized on the electronic forms of standardized data.
