ReviewClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2008
Cardiovascular protection for all individuals at high risk: evidence-based best practice.
Review in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence of hospital-based cardiologists to lipid guidelines in patients at high risk for cardiovascular events (2L registry).Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2011Article
- Cardiovascular outcomes with angiotensin II receptor blockers: clinical implications of recent trials.Vascular health and risk management · 2011Review
- Clinical utility of fixed-combination telmisartan-amlodipine in the treatment of hypertension.Integrated blood pressure control · 2011Article
- Hotline update of clinical trials and registries presented at the German Cardiac Society Meeting 2009.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2009Review
- [Erectile dysfunction: indicator of end-organ damage in cardiovascular patients].Medizinische Klinik (Munich, Germany : 1983) · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with cardiovascular risk factors are largely undertreated, for many reasons. Vulnerable individuals may not be aware of the risks they are facing or an individual's risk of cardiovascular disease may be underestimated, particularly among those at high risk. Furthermore, in individuals identified as being at high total cardiovascular risk, the full spectrum of therapeutic options may not be implemented or patients may not adhere to the treatment prescribed. We address these critical issues by summarizing the existing guidelines: our ultimate goal is to encourage the optimal management of individuals at high total cardiovascular risk according to evidence-based medicine, with the expectation that this will improve outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18726243What 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.