Trial reportCirculation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes2010
Evaluation of the American Heart Association cardiovascular disease prevention guideline for women.
Trial report in Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00000611 (Women's Health Initiative), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 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.
Women's Health Initiative (WHI)
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.
- European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012) : the fifth joint task force of the European society of cardiology and other societies on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts).International journal of behavioral medicine · 2012Guideline
- Effectiveness-based guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women--2011 update: a guideline from the american heart association.Circulation · 2011Guideline
- Effectiveness-based guidelines for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in women--2011 update: a guideline from the American Heart Association.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2011Guideline
- Contributions of the Women's Health Initiative to Cardiovascular Research: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2022Review
- High prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis in Brazilian postmenopausal women with low and intermediate risk by Framingham score.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2017Article
- Predictors of cardiovascular risk in women.Women's health (London, England) · 2013Review
- What do the 2011 American Heart Association guidelines tell us about prevention of cardiovascular disease in women?Clinical cardiology · 2011Review
- Active Breathing Coordinator reduces radiation dose to the heart and preserves local control in patients with left breast cancer: report of a prospective trial.Practical radiation oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe 2007 update to the American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women recommend a simplified approach to risk stratification. We assigned Women's Health Initiative participants to risk categories as described in the guideline and evaluated clinical event rates within and between strata. METHODS AND
resultsThe Women's Health Initiative enrolled 161 808 women ages 50 to 79 years and followed them prospectively for 7.8 years (mean). Applying the 2007 AHA guideline categories, 11% of women were high risk, 72% at-risk, and 4% at optimal risk; 13% of women did not fall into any category, that is, lacked risk factors but did not adhere to a healthy lifestyle (moderate intensity exercise for 30 minute most days and <7% of calories from saturated fat). Among high risk, at-risk, and optimal risk women, rates of myocardial infarction/coronary death were 12.5%, 3.1%, and 1.1% per 10 years (P for trend <0.0001); the event rate was 1.3% among women who could not be categorized. We observed a graded relationship between risk category and cardiovascular event rates for white, black, Hispanic, and Asian women, although event rates differed among ethnic groups (P for interaction=0.002). The AHA guideline predicted coronary events with accuracy similar to current Framingham risk categories (area under receiver operating characteristic curve for Framingham risk, 0.665; for AHA risk, 0.664; P=0.94) but less well than proposed Framingham 10-year risk categories of <5%, 5% to 20%, and >20% (area under receiver operating characteristic curve for Framingham risk, 0.724; for AHA risk, 0.664; P<0.0001).
conclusionsRisk stratification as proposed in the 2007 AHA guideline is simple, accessible to patients and providers, and identifies cardiovascular risk with accuracy similar to that of the current Framingham algorithm. Clinical Trial Registration- clinicaltrials.gov. Identifier: NCT00000611.
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.