Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10796813›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2000

Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.

S Ebrahim, G Davey Smith

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cost-effectiveness of implementing new guidelines for treatment of hypertension in general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2004
    Article
  11. Primary prevention of coronary heart disease.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2002
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Preventing cardiovascular disease in primary care.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2001
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S EbrahimSocial Medicine, University of Bristol, Canynge Hall, Whiteladies Road, Bristol, UK, BS8 2PR. shah.ebrahim@bristol.ac.uk
G Davey Smith
University of Bristol · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary prevention programmes in many countries attempt to reduce mortality and morbidity due to coronary heart disease through risk factor modification. It is widely believed that multiple risk factor intervention using counselling and educational methods is efficacious and cost-effective and should be expanded. Recent trials examining risk factor changes have cast considerable doubt on the effectiveness of these multiple risk factor interventions.

objectivesTo assess the effects of multiple risk factor intervention for reducing cardiovascular risk factors, total mortality, and mortality from coronary heart disease among adults without clinical evidence of established cardiovascular disease. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched Medline using a standard randomised trial filter. Date of the most recent search was April 1995. SELECTION CRITERIA: Intervention studies using counseling or education to modify more than one cardiovascular risk factor in adults from general populations, occupational groups, or high risk groups. Trials of less than 6 months duration were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Both reviewers, independently extracted data. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing information. MAIN

resultsA total of 18 trials were found of which 10 reported clinical event data. Net changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure, smoking prevalence, and blood cholesterol were -3.9mmHg (95% CI -4.2,-3.6 mmHg), -2.9 mmHg (95% CI -3.1,-2.7 mmHg), -4.2% (95% CI -4.8, -3.6%), and -0.08mMol/l (95% CI -0.1.-0.06 mMol/l) respectively. In the ten trials with clinical event end-points, the pooled odds ratios for total and coronary heart disease mortality were 0.97 (95% confidence intervals (CI) 0.92-1.02) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.88-1.04) respectively. Statistical heterogeneity between the studies with respect to mortality and risk factor changes was due to trials focusing on hypertensive participants and those using considerable amounts of drug treatment. Only these trials demonstrating significant reductions in mortality. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsThe pooled effects suggest multiple risk factor intervention has no effect on mortality. However, a small, but potentially important, benefit of treatment (about a 10% reduction in CHD mortality) may have been missed. Risk factor changes were relatively modest, were related to the amount of pharmacological treatment used, and in some cases may have been over-estimated because of regression to the mean effects, lack of intention to treat analyses, habituation to blood pressure measurement, and use of self-reports of smoking. Interventions using personal or family counseling and education with or without pharmacological treatments appear to be more effective at achieving risk factor reduction and consequent reductions in mortality in high risk hypertensive populations. The evidence suggests that such interventions have limited utility in the general population.

Indexed as

Coronary DiseaseCounselingHumansPatient Education as TopicRisk Factors

Identifiers

PMID10796813
OpenAlexW4230864225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.