Trial reportBMC cardiovascular disorders2013
Comparing the effectiveness of two cardiovascular prevention programmes for highly educated professionals in general practice: a randomised clinical trial.
Trial report in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Digital health interventions for the prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2015Pooled it
- An umbrella review of efficacy of digital health interventions for workers.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Linking Cardiac Psychology and Cardiovascular Medicine via Self-Determination Theory and Shared Decision-Making.Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings · 2025Review
- The Scope of Practice for Primary Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Expanded to Advanced Practice Providers: What Does the Data Show?Current cardiology reports · 2023Review
- Using clinical prediction models to personalise lifestyle interventions for cardiovascular disease prevention: A systematic literature review.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Review
- Antihypercholesterolemic Effects of Fruit Aqueous Extract ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2017Article
- Modifying health behavior to prevent cardiovascular diseases: a nationwide survey among German primary care physicians.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2014Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease is a major cause of mortality and morbidity and its prevalence is set to increase. While the benefits of medical and lifestyle interventions are established, the effectiveness of interventions which seek to improve the way preventive care is delivered in general practice is less so. The aim was to study and to compare the effectiveness of 2 intervention programmes for reducing cardiovascular risk factors within general practice.
methodsA randomised controlled trial was conducted in Belgium between 2007-2010 with 314 highly educated and mainly healthy professionals allocated to a medical (MP) or a medical + lifestyle (MLP) programme. The MP consisted of medical assessments (screening and follow-up) and the MLP added a tailored lifestyle change programme (web-based and individual coaching) to the MP. Primary outcomes were total cholesterol, blood pressure, and body mass index (BMI). The secondary outcomes were smoking status, fitness-score, and total cardiovascular risk.
resultsThe mean age was 41 years, 95 (32%) participants were female, 7 had a personal cardiovascular event in their medical history and 3 had diabetes. There were no significant differences found between MP and MLP in primary or secondary outcomes. In both study conditions decreases of cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure were found. Unfavourable increases were found for BMI (p < .05). A significant decrease of the overall cardiovascular risk was reported (p < .001).
conclusionsBoth interventions are effective in reducing cardiovascular risk. In our population the combined medical and lifestyle programme was not superior to the medical programme.
trial registrationISRCTN23940498.
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.