ArticleJournal of education and health promotion2019
Comparison of risk factors of cardiovascular diseases in male and female nurses.
Article in Journal of education and health promotion, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dietary Risk Factors and Eating Behaviors in Peripheral Arterial Disease (PAD).International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Elevated plasma fatty acid-binding protein 3 is related to prolonged corrected QT interval and reduced ejection fraction in patients with stable angina.International journal of medical sciences · 2021Observational
- Identification of the Framingham Risk Score by an Entropy-Based Rule Model for Cardiovascular Disease.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCardiovascular disease is one of the most important causes of mortality in the world; identifying and correcting the modifiable risk factors reduce the prevalence of coronary artery disorders. Nurses, with regard to their employment conditions, can be prone to cardiovascular disease. The aim of this study was to compare the risk factors of cardiovascular diseases in male and female nurses. MATERIALS AND
methodsIn this descriptive cross-sectional study, 263 nurses from Jahrom University of Medical Sciences hospitals were enrolled in the study by convenience sampling. The data collection tool was self-report Framingham Risk Score and has two parts: first part: personal data, history of disease, history, cigarette, stress and fat disorder, alcohol consumption, diet, exercise, and average hours and second part: height, weight, body mass index (BMI), waist-to-stature ratio (WSR), waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), blood pressure, triglyceride (TG), cholesterol, and fasting blood sugar. The benchmark for blood pressure was the JNC-7 guide. The Adult Treatment Panel III was the guideline. Independent
resultsNone of the staff reported smoking or alcohol history. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. There was no statistically significant difference between the mean of fasting blood glucose, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, TG and cholesterol, Framingham percentage, religious practices, green tea and black tea, fish, vegetables, and fast food. The data were analyzed with independent
conclusionThe results of the study showed that men are at higher risk for cardiovascular diseases and complications than women.
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.