Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25942424›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Decline in Coronary Mortality in Sweden between 1986 and 2002: Comparing Contributions from Primary and Secondary Prevention.

Lena Björck, Simon Capewell, Martin O'Flaherty, Georgios Lappas, Kathleen Bennett, Annika Rosengren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Observational
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

6 authors.

Lena BjörckDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden; Institute of Health and Care Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Simon CapewellDivision of Public Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Martin O'FlahertyDivision of Public Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Georgios LappasDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Kathleen BennettDepartment of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Trinity Centre for Health Sciences, St James's Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
Annika RosengrenDepartment of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Gothenburg University, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0900847
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe relative importance of risk factor reduction in healthy people (primary prevention) versus that in patients with coronary heart disease (secondary prevention) has been debated. We aimed to quantify the contribution of the two. METHODOLOGY: We used the previously validated IMPACT model to estimate contributions from primary prevention (reducing risk factors in the population, particularly smoking, cholesterol and systolic blood pressure) and from secondary prevention (reducing risk factors in coronary heart disease patients) in the Swedish population. PRINCIPAL

findingsBetween 1986 and 2002, about 8,690 fewer deaths were related to changes in the three major risk factors. Population cholesterol fell by 0.64 mmol/L, with approximately 5,210 fewer deaths attributable to diet changes (4,470 in healthy people740 in patients.) plus 810 to statin treatment (200 in healthy people, 610 in patients). Overall smoking prevalence decreased by 10.3%, resulting in 1,195 fewer deaths, attributable to smoking cessation (595 in healthy people, 600 in patients). Mean population systolic blood pressure fell by 2.6 mmHg, resulting in 900 fewer deaths (865 in healthy people, 35 in patients), plus 575 fewer deaths attributable to antihypertensive medication in healthy people. The majority of falls in deaths attributable to risk factors occurred in people without known heart disease: 6,705 fewer deaths compared with 1,985 fewer deaths in patients (secondary prevention), emphasizing the importance of promoting health interventions in the general population.

conclusionsThe largest effects on mortality came from primary prevention, giving markedly larger mortality reductions than secondary prevention.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntihypertensive AgentsBlood PressureCholesterolCoronary DiseaseHumansMiddle AgedRisk FactorsSecondary PreventionSmokingSmoking CessationSwedenAntihypertensive AgentsCholesterol

Identifiers

PMID25942424
PMCPMC4420282

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.