Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26846937›Full record

ReviewJACC. Cardiovascular imaging2016

Noninvasive Cardiovascular Risk Assessment of the Asymptomatic Diabetic Patient: The Imaging Council of the American College of Cardiology.

Matthew J Budoff, Paolo Raggi, George A Beller, Daniel S Berman, Regina S Druz, Shaista Malik, Vera H Rigolin, Wm Guy Weigold, Prem Soman, Imaging Council of the American College of Cardiology

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in JACC. Cardiovascular imaging, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
14.5field-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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 98 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Screening for Asymptomatic Coronary Artery DiseaseFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 9 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthew J BudoffDepartment of Medicine, Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA, Torrance, California. Electronic address: Budoff@ucla.edu.
Paolo RaggiMazankowski Alberta Heart Institute, Department of Medicine, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
George A BellerDepartment of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Daniel S BermanDepartments of Imaging and Medicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and the Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Los Angeles, California.
Regina S DruzDepartment of Cardiology, Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine, Uniondale, New York.
Shaista MalikDepartment of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, California.
Vera H RigolinDepartment of Medicine/Division of Cardiology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
Wm Guy WeigoldCardiology Division, MedStar Heart & Vascular Institute, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC.
Prem SomanDivision of Cardiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Imaging Council of the American College of Cardiology
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center · USHofstra University · USMedStar Washington Hospital Center · USNorthwestern University · USThe Lundquist Institute · USUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Pittsburgh Medical Center · USUniversity of Virginia · US

Funding

SBHW-PREDICT (The role of PRoteomics, gEnetics, and Directed Imaging using CT)R01HL128801 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI MALIK, SHAISTA · 2015 to 2019
$3.1M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL128801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes is well established; diabetes is associated with at least a 2-fold increased risk of coronary heart disease. Approximately two-thirds of deaths among persons with diabetes are related to cardiovascular disease. Previously, diabetes was regarded as a "coronary risk equivalent," implying a high 10-year cardiovascular risk for every diabetes patient. Following the original study by Haffner et al., multiple studies from different cohorts provided varying conclusions on the validity of the concept of coronary risk equivalency in patients with diabetes. New guidelines have started to acknowledge the heterogeneity in risk and include different treatment recommendations for diabetic patients without other risk factors who are considered to be at lower risk. Furthermore, guidelines have suggested that further risk stratification in patients with diabetes is warranted before universal treatment. The Imaging Council of the American College of Cardiology systematically reviewed all modalities commonly used for risk stratification in persons with diabetes mellitus and summarized the data and recommendations. This document reviews the evidence regarding the use of noninvasive testing to stratify asymptomatic patients with diabetes with regard to coronary heart disease risk and develops an algorithm for screening based on available data.

Indexed as

CardiologyDiagnostic ImagingExercise TestSocieties, MedicalAlgorithmsAsymptomatic DiseasesCardiovascular DiseasesClinical ProtocolsDiabetes ComplicationsFemaleHumansMalePractice Guidelines as TopicPredictive Value of TestsPrognosisRisk Assessmentcoronary CTdiabetesechocardiographyexercise testingnuclear imaging

Identifiers

PMID26846937
PMCPMC5371352
OpenAlexW2256858341

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.