ArticleAtencion primaria2011
[Cardiovascular risk in Spanish smokers compared to non-smokers: RETRATOS study].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the level of cardiovascular risk in smokers seenin Primary Care clinics.
designEpidemiologic, cross-sectional and multicentre study.
settingPrimary Care. PATIENTS: Every investigator included 4 consecutive patients (3 smokers, 1 non-smoker) aged 35-50 years, who came to the clinic for any reason. A total of 2,184 patients were included; 2,124 (1,597 smokers; 527 non-smokers) were evaluated and 60 patients were excluded because they did not meet with selection criteria. MEASUREMENTS: The 10-year risk of suffering from a fatal cardiovascular disease (CVDR) was calculated according to the SCORE (Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation) model. The 10-year lethal CVR according SCORE model, was classified as: very high (> 15%), high (10-14%), slightly high (5-9%), average (3-4%), low (2%), very low (1%) and negligible (< 1%). A logistical regression model was used to estimate the relationship between smoking and prior cardiovascular events.
results10-year fatal CVDR according to the SCORE model was significantly higher in smokers (40±5.3) vs. non-smokers (1.9±2.5) (P<.0001). RISK STRATIFICATION: low (< 3%) [78.0% non-smokers vs. 60.7% smokers (P<.0001)]; intermediate (3-5%) [11.1% non-smokers vs. 12.6% smokers (P<.001)]; high (> 5%) [10.9% non-smokers vs. 26.7% smokers (P<.001)]. The logistical regression model showed that non-smokers vs. smokers had less probability of suffering myocardial infarction (OR 0.3; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.1-0.8; P<.0001), peripheral vascular disease (OR 0.6; 95% CI: 0.4-1.0; P=.0180) and chronic obstructive lung disease (OR 0.18; 95% CI: 0.1-0.2; P=.0507).
conclusionsSmoking is related to a high risk of fatal cardiovascular disease. Active promotion in Primary Care clinics of measures aimed at reducing the prevalence of the smoking habit would lead to a lowering of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
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.