Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18950561›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2008

Biomarkers of atherosclerosis: clinical applications.

Todd M Brown, Vera Bittner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Supplements of an aqueous combination ofAnimal models and experimental medicine · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Identification and evaluation of anti-inflammatory properties of aqueous components extracted from sesame (Sesamum indicum) oil.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2018
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

2 authors.

Todd M BrownPreventive Cardiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Division of Cardiovascular Disease, 701 19th Street South - LHRB 310, Birmingham, AL 35294-0007, USA.
Vera Bittner

Funding

REGARDS - MI StudyR01HL080477 · NHLBI · WEILL MEDICAL COLL OF CORNELL UNIV · PI LEVITAN, EMILY B, SAFFORD, MONIKA M · 2006 to 2020
$11.6M
UAB Health Services Research (HSR) Training ProgramT32HS013852 · AHRQ · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI LEVITAN, EMILY B, MUGAVERO, MICHAEL J · 2003 to 2024
$8.0M
AHRQ HHS 5 T32 HS013852AHRQ HHS HS013852AHRQ HHS HS013852-07AHRQ HHS T32 HS013852NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL080477
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current cardiovascular risk prediction models incorporate traditional risk factors to estimate 10-year cardiovascular risk. Numerous blood-based biomarkers have been identified that are associated with increased cardiovascular risk after adjusting for traditional risk factors. Many of these biomarkers, alone or in combination, have been incorporated into risk prediction models to determine whether their addition increases the model's predictive ability. We review the recently published literature on blood-based biomarkers and examine whether incorporating these markers may improve clinical decision making.

Indexed as

AtherosclerosisBiomarkersCardiovascular DiseasesCystatin CHumansInflammationLipoproteinsModels, TheoreticalNatriuretic Peptide, BrainRisk FactorsTime FactorsTroponinBiomarkersCystatin CLipoproteinsNatriuretic Peptide, BrainTroponin

Identifiers

PMID18950561
PMCPMC2774886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.