ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2009
Can individuals with a significant risk for cardiovascular disease be adequately identified by combination of several risk factors? Modelling study based on the Norwegian HUNT 2 population.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Time trends in statin utilisation and coronary mortality in Western European countries.BMJ open · 2016Article
- Is there an association between disease ignorance and self-rated health? The HUNT Study, a cross-sectional survey.BMJ open · 2014Observational
- The relationship of a family history for hypertension, myocardial infarction, or stroke with cardiovascular physiology in young women.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2014Article
- Is the use of cholesterol in mortality risk algorithms in clinical guidelines valid? Ten years prospective data from the Norwegian HUNT 2 study.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2012Article
- Derivation and validation of a new cardiovascular risk score for people with type 2 diabetes: the new zealand diabetes cohort study.Diabetes care · 2010Article
- Current European guidelines for management of arterial hypertension: are they adequate for use in primary care? Modelling study based on the Norwegian HUNT 2 population.BMC family practice · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
RATIONALE, AIMS AND
objectivesClinicians are generally advised to consider several risk factors when evaluating patients' cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Our aim was to study whether combined assessment of five traditional risk factors might help doctors demarcate a relatively distinct and manageable group of high-risk individuals. We selected five modifiable risk factors and estimated the proportion of a well-defined population with 'unfavourable' levels of at least two of them, as defined by four internationally renowned guidelines. The impact of including so-called 'prehypertension' among the risk factors was specifically addressed, and the results are discussed in a wider perspective. MATERIAL AND
methodsGuideline implementation was modelled on data from a cross-sectional Norwegian population study comprising 62 104 adults aged 20-79 years (The Nord-Tröndelag Health Study 1995-7). Total, age- and gender-specific point prevalences of individuals with zero, one, two, three or more factors, in addition to established disease, were calculated.
resultsOne single CVD risk factor was exhibited by 12.4% of the population; two factors by 21.5%; and three or more by 49.7%. Established CVD or diabetes mellitus was reported by 12.5%. In total, 83.7% of the population exhibited a risk or disease profile with at least two factors, if prehypertension was included.
conclusionsIf guideline recommendations are literally applied, as many as 84% of adults in Norway could exhibit two or more CVD or risk factors and thus be considered in need of individual, clinical attention. This challenges the widely held presumption that 'the net will close' around a manageable group of individuals-at-risk if several risk factors are jointly considered. As the finding of this study arises in one of the world's most long- and healthy-living populations, it raises several practical as well as ethical questions.
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.