ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2010
Trends in age-standardised and age-specific mortality from ischaemic heart disease in Germany.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2010. 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.
- Epidemiological trends in mortality, event rates and case fatality of acute myocardial infarction from 2004 to 2015: results from the KORA MI registry.Annals of medicine · 2021Article
- Trends in age-specific cerebrovascular disease in the European Union.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2014Article
- Population aging and hospitalization for chronic disease in Germany.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2012Article
- Translating evidence into policy for cardiovascular disease control in India.Health research policy and systems · 2011Article
- [Development of mortality and morbidity of vascular diseases: variations between coronary heart disease and stroke].Der Nervenarzt · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResearch from some industrialised countries indicated a flattening of the declining ischaemic heart disease (IHD) mortality trends in certain population groups. This study aims to investigate age-standardised, as well as sex- and age-specific time trends in IHD mortality in Germany.
methodsUsing German vital statistics between 1980 and 2007, age-standardised and age-specific IHD mortality rates for men and women were calculated. Joinpoint software was used to estimate average annual percentage changes (AAPC) together with 95% confidence intervals and to identify changing trends in mortality. To account for the reunification in 1990 trends for West Germany alone were investigated in sensitivity analysis.
resultsSince 1980, marked decreases in mortality of 50% in men and 39% in women were observed, with AAPC of 2.4 and 1.5%, respectively. While moderate declines in mortality were observed since the early 1980s in men, significant decreases in women were only found after 1995. Trends in mortality varied substantially across age groups, showing decreases in older age (75+ years) only during the last 5-10 years. A flattening of mortality declines was not observed. In West Germany, overall decreases and AAPC were larger and differences between men and women were somewhat smaller.
conclusionGerman IHD mortality trends present a complex picture with profound decreases since 1980. However, declines were smaller and delayed compared to other industrialised countries. Also, time trends were not homogeneous in men and women, as well as across age groups. Preventive measures need to be strengthened to account for failures in the past and to counter the increasing burden of modifiable risk factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20333408What 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.