SynthesisBMJ open2017
Screening for coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness of screening of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes at a very high cardiovascular risk (SCADIAB) study. Updated study design: emulation of a randomised target trial using electronic health records.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2023Article
- Systematic Analysis of the Global, Regional and National Burden of Cardiovascular Diseases from 1990 to 2017.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2022Article
- Screening for occult coronary artery disease in potential kidney transplant recipients: time for reappraisal?Clinical kidney journal · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness of screening of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 DIABetes at a very high cardiovascular risk (SCADIAB study) rational and design.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2021Article
- Effect of miRNA-136-targeted regulation of FGFR1 on proliferation and apoptosis of triple-negative breast cancer cells.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Prevalence of asymptomatic or "silent" myocardial ischemia in diabetic patients: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2021Article
- Feasibility Study of Advanced Cardiovascular Screening in Middle-Aged Patients with Diabetes.Clinical epidemiology · 2020Article
- Cardiovascular Screening for the Asymptomatic Patient with Diabetes: More Cons Than Pros.Journal of diabetes research · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of coronary artery disease screening in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes and assess the statistical reliability of the findings.
methodsElectronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and clinicaltrials.org) were reviewed up to July 2016. Randomised controlled trials evaluating coronary artery disease screening in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes and reporting cardiovascular events and/or mortality were included. Data were summarised with Mantel-Haenszel relative risk. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to evaluate the optimal sample size to detect a 40% reduction in outcomes. Main outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiac events (non-fatal myocardial infarction and cardiovascular death); secondary outcomes were non-fatal myocardial infarction, myocardial revascularisations and heart failure.
resultsOne hundred thirty-five references were identified and 5 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria and totalised 3315 patients, 117 all-cause deaths and 100 cardiac events. Screening for coronary artery disease was not associated with decrease in risk for all-cause deaths (RR 0.95(95% CI 0.66 to 1.35)) or cardiac events (RR 0.72(95% CI 0.49 to 1.06)). TSA shows that futility boundaries were reached for all-cause mortality and a relative risk reduction of 40% between treatments could be discarded. However, there is not enough information for firm conclusions for cardiac events. For secondary outcomes no benefit or harm was identified; optimal sample sizes were not reached.
conclusionCurrent available data do not support screening for coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes for preventing fatal events. Further studies are needed to assess the effects on cardiac events. PROSPERO: CRD42015026627.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.