ArticleEuropean radiology2018
Coronary artery calcium assessed with calibrated mass scoring in asymptomatic individuals: results from the Copenhagen General Population Study.
Article in European radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- The Danish comorbidity in liver transplant recipients study (DACOLT): a non-interventional prospective observational cohort study.BMC gastroenterology · 2021Observational
- Evaluation of an AI-based, automatic coronary artery calcium scoring software.European radiology · 2020Observational
- Coronary artery CT calcium score assessed by direct calcium quantification using atomic absorption spectroscopy and compared to macroscopic and histological assessments.International journal of legal medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCoronary artery calcification (CAC) is commonly assessed with Agatston score (AS). A higher sensitivity and precision for the detection of CAC has been demonstrated with calibrated mass score (cMS). We hypothesized that cMS would detect low-level CAC not detectable with AS in a large asymptomatic background population.
methodsParticipants (N = 2985) from the Copenhagen General Population Study were evaluated for CAC using both conventional AS and cMS. The population was grouped according to number of traditional risk factors and heart score was used to assess the risk of event for those with no CAC, those with only cMS > 0 and those with both AS and cMS > 0.
resultsIn participants with an AS = 0, 11% had cMS > 0. The risk profile of this cMS-only group was between that of the CAC-negative participants and those with AS > 0 and cMS > 0. Overall, 6% of the population belonged to the cMS-only group independent of the number of risk factors.
conclusionIn individuals with AS = 0, a fraction was found to have cMS > 0. Based on traditional risk factors, this group has a higher 10-year risk than individuals with both AS = 0 and cMS = 0; cMS might offer very early cardiovascular risk assessment in asymptomatic individuals. KEY POINTS: • In individuals with AS=0, a fraction has CAC with highly sensitive cMS. • This fraction has a higher 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease. • Regardless of risk factors, 6% has CAC detectable only with cMS. • cMS might offer very early cardiovascular risk assessment in asymptomatic individuals.
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.