Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16614335›Full record

ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2006

Explaining the social gradient in coronary heart disease: comparing relative and absolute risk approaches.

John Lynch, George Davey Smith, Sam Harper, Kathleen Bainbridge

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

60 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 176 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Educational attainment and mortality in schizophrenia.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Who can tolerate a marginal kidney? Predicting survival after deceased donor kidney transplant by donor-recipient combination.American journal of transplantation : official journal of the American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons · 2019
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

John LynchDepartment Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Purvis Hall, 1020 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, Canada QC H3A 1A2. John.Lynch@McGill.ca
George Davey Smith
Sam Harper
Kathleen Bainbridge
McGill University · CASocial and Scientific Systems (United States) · USUniversity of Bristol · GB

Funding

MECHANISMS UNDERLYING PSYCHOSOCIAL ASSOCIATION WITH IHDR01HL044199 · NHLBI · WESTERN CONSORTIUM FOR PUBLIC HEALTH · PI KAPLAN, GEORGE A. · 1990 to 2001
$670k
NHLBI NIH HHS HL44199PHS HHS 263-MQ-314803PHS HHS 5P50 NDO3898605
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

objectivesThere are contradictory perspectives on the importance of conventional coronary heart disease (CHD) risk factors in explaining population levels and social gradients in CHD. This study examined the contribution of conventional CHD risk factors (smoking, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, and diabetes) to explaining population levels and to absolute and relative social inequalities in CHD. This was investigated in an entire population and by creating a low risk sub-population with no smoking, dyslipidaemia, diabetes, and hypertension to simulate what would happen to relative and social inequalities in CHD if conventional risk factors were removed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsPopulation based study of 2682 eastern Finnish men aged 42, 48, 54, 60 at baseline with 10.5 years average follow up of fatal (ICD9 codes 410-414) and non-fatal (MONICA criteria) CHD events. MAIN

resultsIn the whole population, 94.6% of events occurred among men exposed to at least one conventional risk factor, with a PAR of 68%. Adjustment for conventional risk factors reduced relative social inequality by 24%. However, in a low risk population free from conventional risk factors, absolute social inequality reduced by 72%.

conclusionsConventional risk factors explain the majority of absolute social inequality in CHD because conventional risk factors explain the vast majority of CHD cases in the population. However, the role of conventional risk factors in explaining relative social inequality was modest. This apparent paradox may arise in populations where inequalities in conventional risk factors between social groups are low, relative to the high levels of conventional risk factors within every social group. If the concern is to reduce the overall population health burden of CHD and the disproportionate population health burden associated with the social inequalities in CHD, then reducing conventional risk factors will do the job.

Indexed as

Social ClassAdultCoronary DiseaseDiabetes MellitusDyslipidemiasFinlandHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSmoking

Identifiers

PMID16614335
PMCPMC2563981
OpenAlexW1984846764

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.