Table 1 Summary of population studies on the prevalence of left ventricular systolic dysfunction (adapted from Wang et al2)

Study (reference)	Country	Participants (n)	Mean age (years)	Men (%)	LVSD criteria	Prevalence of LVSD (%)	Prevalence of LVSD without CHF†
EF >0.40, or equivalent
Strong Heart study4	USA	3184	58	37	EF ⩽0.54	14.0	12.5
HyperGEN study6	USA	2086	55	38	EF ⩽0.54	14.0	12.9
Davies et al7	England	3960	61	50	EF ⩽0.50	5.3	3.3
MONICA project (Augsburg)15	Germany	1566	50	48	EF ⩽0.48	2.7	1.1
Hedberg et al16	Sweden	412	75	50	WMI ⩾1.7	6.8	3.2
Nielsen et al17	Denmark	126	70	55	WMI ⩾1.5 or FS ⩽0.26	2.9	1.0
Rotterdam study18	Netherlands	2267	66	45	FS ⩽0.25	3.7	2.9
Helsinki Ageing study19	Finland	501	—	27	FS ⩽0.25	10.8	8.6

EF ⩽0.40
Strong Heart study4	USA	3184	58	37	EF ⩽0.40	2.9	2.1
HyperGEN study6	USA	2086	55	38	EF ⩽0.40	4.0	3.4
Davies et al7	England	3960	61	50	EF ⩽0.40	1.8	0.9
MONICA project (Glasgow)8	Scotland	1467	50	48	EF ⩽0.35	7.7	5.9
MONICA project (Glasgow)8	Scotland	1467	50	48	EF ⩽0.30	2.9	1.4

Qualitatively “reduced” EF
Cardiovascular Health study20	USA	5532	73	42	Qualitative	3.5	2.5
Morgan et al21	England	817	76	46	Qualitative	7.5	3.9

CHF, congestive heart failure; EF, ejection fraction; FS, fractional shortening; HyperGEN, Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network; LVSD, left ventricular systolic dysfunction; MONICA, Monitoring Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease; WMI, wall-motion index.