ArticleMedicine2019
Relationship between the optimal cut-off values of anthropometric indices for predicting metabolic syndrome and carotid intima-medial thickness in a Korean population.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determinants of Dyslipidemia in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Waist-to-height ratio is a simple and practical alternative to waist circumference to diagnose metabolic syndrome in type 2 diabetes.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Macroscopic Evaluation of Atherosclerosis in the Arteries: An Autopsy Assessment Tool.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2021Article
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anthropometric measurements are simple and useful methods for predicting metabolic syndrome (MetS) because obesity is a predominant feature of MetS. Although carotid intima-medial thickness (IMT) is generally used to evaluate subclinical atherosclerosis, the relationship between the optimal cut-off anthropometric values for predicting MetS and carotid IMT has not been analyzed in a Korean population.Anthropometric measurements including waist circumference (WC), waist hip ratio (WHR), waist height ratio (WHtR), body mass index (BMI), and carotid IMT were assessed in 2560 Korean subjects without previous history of cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, neurological abnormalities, or malignancy who participated in baseline health examinations in a self-referral setting in the Seoul area between April 2010 and November 2012. MetS was defined using the National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III criteria.In both men and women, the levels of all anthropometric indices were significantly higher in subjects with MetS than in those without MetS. According to the receiver operating characteristic curve, the values of 80.8 cm for WC, 0.87 for WHR, 0.52 for WHtR, and 24.6 kg/m for BMI were the optimal cut-offs for predicting MetS in women. The values of 89.3 cm for WC, 0.90 for WHR, 0.52 for WHtR, and 25.1 kg/m for BMI were the optimal cut-offs for predicting MetS in men. After adjusting for confounding factors, the WC optimal cut-off values for predicting MetS were independently associated with carotid IMT in both women and men (women: β = 0.016, P = .008; men: β = 0.033, P = .009). The optimal BMI cut-off value was independently associated with carotid IMT in men only (β = 0.027, P = .032).Among anthropometric indices including WC, WHR, WHtR, and BMI, the WC optimal cut-off values for MetS were independently associated with an increased carotid IMT in both women and men in a Korean population.
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.