Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24566438›Full record

ReviewNutrients2014

Omega-3 index and cardiovascular health.

Clemens von Schacky

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nutrients, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
13.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 148 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

4 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Clemens von SchackyPreventive Cardiology, Medical Clinic and Poli-Clinic I, Ludwig Maximilians-University Munich, Ziemssenstr. 1, Munich 80336, Germany. c.vonschacky@omegametrix.eu.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent large trials with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) in the cardiovascular field did not demonstrate a beneficial effect in terms of reductions of clinical endpoints like total mortality, sudden cardiac arrest or other major adverse cardiac events. Pertinent guidelines do not uniformly recommend EPA + DHA for cardiac patients. In contrast, in epidemiologic findings, higher blood levels of EPA + DHA were consistently associated with a lower risk for the endpoints mentioned. Because of low biological and analytical variability, a standardized analytical procedure, a large database and for other reasons, blood levels of EPA + DHA are frequently assessed in erythrocytes, using the HS-Omega-3 Index® methodology. A low Omega-3 Index fulfills the current criteria for a novel cardiovascular risk factor. Neutral results of intervention trials can be explained by issues of bioavailability and trial design that surfaced after the trials were initiated. In the future, incorporating the Omega-3 Index into trial designs by recruiting participants with a low Omega-3 Index and treating them within a pre-specified target range (e.g., 8%-11%), will make more efficient trials possible and provide clearer answers to the questions asked than previously possible.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesCardiovascular SystemDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic AcidErythrocytesHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicDocosahexaenoic AcidsEicosapentaenoic Acid

Identifiers

PMID24566438
PMCPMC3942733
OpenAlexW2070313752

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.