ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2003
Missing, mediocre, or merely obsolete? An evaluation of UK data sources for coronary heart disease.
Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Explaining the Decline in Coronary Heart Disease Mortality Rate Using IMPACT Model: Estimation of the Changes in Risk Factors and Treatment Uptake in Iran between 2007 and 2016.ARYA atherosclerosis · 2023Article
- Vessel graft fabricated by the on-site differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells towards vascular cells on vascular extracellular matrix scaffold under mechanical stimulation in a rotary bioreactor.Journal of materials chemistry. B · 2019Article
- Continued improvement of cardiovascular mortality in Hungary--impact of increased cardio-metabolic prescriptions.BMC public health · 2010Article
- The cost of cardiovascular disease: rising, declining or staying still?Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2006Article
- Over 20,000 avoidable coronary deaths in England and Wales in 2000: the failure to give effective treatments to many eligible patients.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2006Article
- Urban-rural inequalities in ischemic heart disease in Scotland, 1981-1999.American journal of public health · 2006Article
- Population impact of stricter adherence to recommendations for pharmacological and lifestyle interventions over one year in patients with coronary heart disease.Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2005Article
- First myocardial infarction in a Dutch general practice population: trends in incidence from 1975-2003.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2005Article
- Life-years gained from modern cardiological treatments and population risk factor changes in England and Wales, 1981-2000.American journal of public health · 2005Article
- Assessing the impact of heart failure specialist services on patient populations.BMC health services research · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveCoronary heart disease (CHD) is the commonest cause of death in the UK. However, there is no single comprehensive source of information to support CHD prevention and treatment strategies. Therefore this study evaluated the availability and quality of UK CHD data sources since 1981.
designData sources for England and Wales were identified and appraised on: (1) CHD patient numbers (myocardial infarction, angina, hypertension, and heart failure); (2) uptake of medical and surgical CHD treatments, and (3) population trends in major cardiovascular risk factors.
settingEngland and Wales (population 53 million). MAIN
resultsPopulation and mortality data were easily accessible from Office for National Statistics and British Heart Foundation Annual CHD Statistics; population based risk factor data came principally from the British Regional Heart Study, the General Household Survey, and the Health Survey for England. They were limited for 1981, but more extensive by 2000. Hospital admissions information since 1998 was available online from HES; but trend data and details of interventions were scant. Limited primary care data on consultation rates, prescribing, and treatment uptake were available from published audits and studies.
conclusionsInformation on CHD in the UK is fragmented, patchy, and mixed in quality. Data for women, the elderly populatiom, and ethnic minorities were particularly scarce, exacerbating inequalities. Future CHD disease monitoring and evaluation will require comprehensive and accurate population based information on trends in patient numbers, treatment uptake, and risk factors.
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.