Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23816015›Full record

ReviewAmerican heart journal2013

Rationale and design of the Primary pREvention strategies at the community level to Promote Adherence of treatments to pREvent cardiovascular diseases trial number (CTRI/2012/09/002981).

Farah N Fathima, Rajnish Joshi, Twinkle Agrawal, Shailendra Hegde, Denis Xavier, Dominic Misquith, N Chidambaram, S P Kalantri, Clara Chow, Shofiqul Islam and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in American heart journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Cardiovascular Diseases in India Compared With the United States.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2018
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Towards better hypertension management in India.The Indian journal of medical research · 2014
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

14 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Farah N FathimaSt John's Medical College and Research Institute, Bengaluru, India.
Rajnish Joshi
Twinkle Agrawal
Shailendra Hegde
Denis Xavier
Dominic Misquith
N Chidambaram
S P Kalantri
Clara Chow
Shofiqul Islam
P J Devereaux
Rajeev Gupta
Prem Pais
Salim Yusuf
St.John's Medical College Hospital · INPopulation Health Research Institute · CAFortis Escorts Hospital · INMahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences · INThe George Institute for Global Health · AU

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS HHSN268200900025C
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in low-income countries including India. There is a need for effective, low-cost methods to prevent CVDs in rural India. One strategy is to identify and implement interventions at high-risk individuals using community health workers (CHWs). There is a paucity of CHW-based CVD intervention trials from low-income countries.

methodsWe designed a multicenter, household-level, cluster-randomized trial with 1:1 allocation to intervention and control arms. The CHWs undertook a door-to-door survey and screened 5,699 households in 28 villages from 3 rural regions in India to identify at-risk households. The households were defined as those with ≥1 individual aged ≥35 years and at moderate or high risk for CVD based on the non-laboratory-based National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey score. All at-risk individuals were invited to attend a physician-led village clinic that provided a CVD risk reduction prescription and education about target risk factor levels for CVD control. All households in which at least 1 member at moderate to high risk for CVD had received a risk reduction prescription were eligible for randomization. Households randomized to the CHW-based intervention will receive 1 household visit by a CHW every 2 months, for 12 months. During these visits, CHWs will measure blood pressure, ascertain and reinforce adherence to prescribed therapies, and modify therapy to meet targets. Households randomized to the control arm do not receive CHW visits. At 12 months after randomization, we will evaluate 2 primary outcomes of systolic blood pressure and adherence to antihypertensive drugs and secondary outcomes of INTERHEART risk score, body mass index, and waist-to-hip ratios. At 18 to 24 months after randomization and 6 to 12 months after the last intervention, we will record these outcomes to evaluate sustainability of intervention.

resultsCommunity health workers screened a total of 5,033 households that included 9,248 individuals and identified 2,571 households with 3,784 at-risk individuals. We randomized 2,438 households (1,219 to intervention and 1,219 to control groups).

conclusionOur large trial of CHWs in rural India will provide important information regarding a promising approach to primary prevention of CVDs.

Indexed as

Community Health WorkersHealth PromotionMedication AdherenceAlgorithmsCardiovascular DiseasesClinical ProtocolsHumansPrimary PreventionRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk Reduction Behavior

Identifiers

PMID23816015
PMCPMC3750498
OpenAlexW2035770453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.