Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19821989›Full record

Trial reportBMC health services research2009

Realising the potential of the family history in risk assessment and primary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care: ADDFAM study protocol.

Nadeem Qureshi, Sarah Armstrong, Paula Saukko, Tracey Sach, Jo Middlemass, Phil H Evans, Joe Kai, Hannah Farrimond, Steve E Humphries

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC health services research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Building the evidence base for decision making in cancer genomic medicine using comparative effectiveness research.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2012
    Review
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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Nadeem QureshiDivision of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. nadeem.qureshi@nottingham.ac.uk
Sarah Armstrong
Paula Saukko
Tracey Sach
Jo Middlemass
Phil H Evans
Joe Kai
Hannah Farrimond
Steve E Humphries
University of Nottingham · GBLoughborough University · GBNottinghamshire County Council · GBPeninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry · GBUniversity College London · GBUniversity of East Anglia · GBUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation RG/08/008/25291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death in the developed world, and its prevention a core activity in current UK general practice. Currently, family history is not systematically integrated into cardiovascular risk assessment in the UK, Europe or the US. Further, primary health care professionals' lack the confidence to interpret family history information and there is a low level of recording of family history information in General Practice (GP) records. Primary prevention of CHD through lifestyle advice has sometimes yielded modest results although, for example, behavioural interventions targeted at "at risk" patients have produced encouraging findings. A family history approach, targeted at those requesting CHD assessment, could motivate lifestyle change. The project will assess the clinical value of incorporating systematic family history information into CHD risk assessment in primary care, from the perspective of the users of this service, the health care practitioners providing this service, and the National Health Service. METHODS/

designThe study will include three distinct phases: (1) cross-sectional survey to ascertain baseline information on current recording of family information; (2) through an exploratory matched-pair cluster randomised study, with nested qualitative semi-structured interview and focus group study, to assess the impact of systematic family history recording on participants' and primary care professionals' experience; (3) develop an economic model of the costs and benefits of incorporating family history into CHD risk assessment. DISCUSSION: On completion of the project, users and primary care practitioners will be more informed of the value and utility of including family history in CHD risk assessment. Further, this approach will also act as a model of how familial risk information can be integrated within mainstream primary care preventive services for common chronic diseases.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN17943542.

Indexed as

Medical History TakingPrimary Health CarePrimary PreventionCoronary DiseaseCross-Sectional StudiesFocus GroupsGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansInterviews as TopicLife StyleRisk AssessmentState MedicineUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID19821989
PMCPMC2765435
OpenAlexW1968445089

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.