ArticleBMC public health2008
The Sandwell Project: a controlled evaluation of a programme of targeted screening for prevention of cardiovascular disease in primary care.
Article in BMC public health, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Are interventions to increase the uptake of screening for cardiovascular disease risk factors effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC family practice · 2017Pooled it
- Screening for increased cardiometabolic risk in primary care: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Pooled it
- Targeted case finding in the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2016 · on this mapTrial
- Impact of a nurse-led programme on comorbidity management and impact of a patient self-assessment of disease activity on the management of rheumatoid arthritis: results of a prospective, multicentre, randomised, controlled trial (COMEDRA).Annals of the rheumatic diseases · 2015Trial
- Mixed methods evaluation of targeted case finding for cardiovascular disease prevention using a stepped wedged cluster RCT.BMC public health · 2012Trial
- Digital Recruitment and Acceptance of a Stepwise Model to Prevent Chronic Disease in the Danish Primary Care Sector: Cross-Sectional Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2019Article
- Article
- Treatment gaps and potential cardiovascular risk reduction from expanded statin use in the US and England.PloS one · 2018Article
- Cost effectiveness of case-finding strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a modelling study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Article
- The effect of blood pressure and cholesterol variability on the precision of Framingham cardiovascular risk estimation: a simulation study.Journal of human hypertension · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA pilot cardiovascular disease prevention project was implemented in the inner-city West Midlands. It was evaluated by comparing its effectiveness to a control group where full implementation was delayed by a year.
methodsCardiovascular risk factor data were extracted on all untreated patients 35 to 74 years old from electronic medical databases in six general practices. A best estimate of ten-year CVD risk cardiovascular risk was calculated on all patients using the extracted risk factor data. Default risk-factor values were used for all missing risk factor data. High risk patients were thus identified. In four practices a project nurse systematically invited, assessed and referred high risk patients for treatment. Two control practices were provided with a list of their high risk patients. The outcomes were the proportions of untreated high-risk patients who were assessed, identified as eligible for treatment and treated under two strategies for identifying and treating such patients in primary care.
resultsOf all high-risk patients suitable for inclusion in the project, 40.6% (95% CI: 36.7 to 45.7%) of patients in intervention practices were started on treatment were started on at least one treatment, compared to 12.7% (95% CI: 9.8% to 16.1%) in control practices.
conclusionA strategy using electronic primary care records to identify high risk patients for CVD prevention works best with a process for acting on information, ensuring patients are invited, assessed and treated.
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.