ArticleAtencion primaria2000
[Effectiveness of the protocols on cardiovascular risks in the Basque Country].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Control of blood pressure in a population of patients with hypertension and in a subgroup with hypertension and diabetes: relationship with characteristics of the health care center and the community].Atencion primaria · 2001Article
- [Diagnosis and monitoring of hypertension in Catalonia. The DISEHTAC study].Atencion primaria · 2001Article
- [Quality analysis of clinical practice guidelines on cardiovascular risks in the Basque country and a proposal for their evaluacion].Atencion primaria · 2000Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo find the effectiveness of clinical protocols in detecting and monitoring the most important cardiovascular risk factors: tobacco dependency, high blood pressure, hyperlipaemia and diabetes mellitus.
designCross-sectional descriptive study.
settingPrimary care centres in the Basque Country.
participants1485 clinical histories of users aged between 40 and 75 who had attended for consultation over the previous two years, registered with general practitioners in the Basque Country who normally use clinical histories. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsA questionnaire was sent to the people in charge of the 103 hierarchically organised centres requesting information on the use of protocols to detect and monitor the problems studied, and copies of protocols were requested. 77 centres (76%) replied and 66 sent 170 protocols. 990 clinical histories of doctors who used the four protocols and 495 of doctors who used none were analysed. These clinical histories belonged to lists of 45 doctors from 22 centres, chosen at random and stratified by whether their centre is registered with the PAPPS (preventive programme) or is a family and community medicine teaching centre. The centres using protocols were better at detecting tobacco dependency (24.6% vs 11.9%--p < 0.0005), hyperlipaemia (61.8% vs 53.1%--p < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (75% vs 66.1%--p < 0.0005). The difference was less in the case of high blood pressure: 56.8% vs 52.1% (p = 0.097). No differences in quality in the monitoring of these problems were found.
conclusionsThe use of cardiovascular risk protocols by primary care centres is related to an improvement in the quality of cardiovascular risk detection, although not of its control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.