ArticlePreventive medicine reports2018
A randomized controlled trial in Norwegian pharmacies on effects of risk alert and advice in people with elevated cardiovascular risk.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02223793 (Effects of Cardiovascular Risk Screening in Pharmacies), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effects of Cardiovascular Risk Screening in Pharmacies: A Randomized Study
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pharmacists' involvement in physical activity promotion in community pharmacy: a systematic review.European journal of public health · 2024Pooled it
- Cardiovascular disease risk communication and prevention: a meta-analysis.European heart journal · 2024Pooled it
- Reproducibility and comparison of a digital food frequency questionnaire (DIGIKOST-FFQ) assessing adherence to national diet and lifestyle recommendations.Food & nutrition research · 2024Article
- Fatty acid profile and estimated desaturase activities in whole blood are associated with metabolic health.Lipids in health and disease · 2020Article
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated if alerting subjects to elevated total cholesterol (TC), hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and blood pressure (BP) (cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors that are usually asymptomatic), and if providing advice would result in reduced risk. We conducted a multicenter (50 community pharmacies) parallel three-arm 8-week randomized controlled trial (RCT) with a 52-week follow-up visit. During six days of screening, TC, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, HbA1c, BP and body mass index (BMI) were assessed in 1318 individuals. Of these, 582 with a measured and predefined elevated ad hoc CVD risk score were randomized to either Alert/advice (n = 198) (immediately alerted of their screening result and received healthy lifestyle-advice), Advice-only (n = 185) (received only advice) or Control (n = 199) (not alert, no advice). Changes in risk score and self-reported health-related behaviors (diet, alcohol, physical activity) were assessed in pharmacies after 8 weeks (N = 543; 93%). Although the primary analysis showed no significant difference between groups, the Control group had the largest reduction in risk score of 14%. The total (uncontrolled) sample (N = 543) reduced the risk score by 3.2% beyond estimated regression towards the mean and improved their health-related behaviors. Among the 65% (n = 377) who returned 52 weeks after baseline, 14% reported started using CVD preventive medication after the screening. The study demonstrated that while assessing risk factors and behaviors in pharmacies proved efficient and possibly led to a small risk decrease, alerting people to their screening result did not seem to be more effective than a self-directed approach. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02223793.
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.