ArticleClinical rheumatology2017
Assessment of six cardiovascular risk calculators in Mexican mestizo patients with rheumatoid arthritis according to the EULAR 2015/2016 recommendations for cardiovascular risk management.
Article in Clinical rheumatology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardiovascular issues in rheumatic diseases.Clinical rheumatology · 2023Review
- Carotid atherosclerosis in the first five years since rheumatoid arthritis diagnosis: a cross sectional study.Advances in rheumatology (London, England) · 2023Article
- Management of hypertension and dyslipidemia in Mexico: Evidence, gaps, and approach.Archivos de cardiologia de Mexico · 2023Article
- The comparison of cardiovascular disease risk prediction scores and evaluation of subclinical atherosclerosis in rheumatoid arthritis: a cross-sectional study.Clinical rheumatology · 2022Article
- Cardiovascular risk factors' behavior during the early stages of the disease, in Hispanic rheumatoid arthritis patients: a cohort study.Rheumatology international · 2020Article
- The best cardiovascular risk calculator to predict carotid plaques in rheumatoid arthritis patients.Clinical rheumatology · 2018Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Variability of the 10-year cardiovascular (CV) risk predicted by the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) using lipids, FRS using body mass index (BMI), Reynolds Risk Score (RRS), QRISK2, Extended Risk Score-Rheumatoid Arthritis (ERS-RA), and algorithm developed by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association in 2013 (ACC/AHA 2013) according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) 2015/2016 update of its evidence-based recommendations for cardiovascular risk management in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) has not been evaluated in Mexican mestizo patients. CV risk was predicted using six different risk calculators in 116 patients, aged 40-75, who fulfilled the ACR/EULAR 2010 classification criteria. Results were multiplied by 1.5 according to the EULAR 2015/2016 update. Global comparison of the risk predicted by all scales was done using the Friedman test, considering a P value of ≤0.05 as statistically significant. Individual comparison between the algorithms was made using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, and a P value of ≤0.003 was considered statistically significant. All calculators showed to be different in the Friedman test (p ≤ 0.001). Median values of predicted 10-year CV risk were 11.02% (6.18-17.55) for FRS BMI; 8.47% (4.6-13.16) for FRS lipids; 5.55% (2.5-11.85) for QRISK2; 5% (3.1-8.65) for ERS-RA; 3.6% (1.5-9.3) for ACC/AHA 2013; and 1.5% (1.5-4.5) for RRS. ERS-RA showed no difference when compared against QRISK2 (p = 0.269). CV risk calculators showed variability among them and cannot be used indistinctly in RA-patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28150104What 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.