ReviewHerz2020
Biomarkers in primary prevention : Meaningful diagnosis based on biomarker scores?
Review in Herz, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- DNA and RNA Molecules as a Foundation of Therapy Strategies for Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- Precision Medicine and the future of Cardiovascular Diseases: A Clinically Oriented Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- High sensitivity troponins: A potential biomarkers of cardiovascular risk for primary prevention.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
- Cardiac Troponin T Release after Football 7 in Healthy Children and Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Biomarkers for Heart Failure Prognosis: Proteins, Genetic Scores and Non-coding RNAs.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment is based on the utilization of risk scores, enabling clinicians to estimate an individual's risk to develop CV pathologies and events. Such risk scores comprise classic CV risk factors such as smoking, diabetes, hypertension, and blood cholesterol levels. Recently, other CV biomarkers such as cardiac troponins have been suggested and evaluated as alternative biomarkers not only in the acute diagnostic setting of myocardial infarction, but also as markers for risk stratification in the general population. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on biomarkers in the field of primary prevention in cardiovascular disease (CVD). Furthermore, we present potential alternative biomarker-based strategies for CV risk assessment. In this respect we provide an outlook on the potential use of genomic variation as well as circulating non-coding RNAs to complement current risk assessment strategies so as to further personalize risk stratification in CVD.
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.