ArticleSystematic reviews2020
Determining optimal strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review, cost-effectiveness review and network meta-analysis protocol.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determining optimal strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a synopsis of an evidence synthesis study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025 · on this mapPooled it
- Identifying optimal primary prevention interventions for major cardiovascular disease events and all-cause mortality: a systematic review and hierarchical network meta-analysis of RCTs.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025 · on this mapPooled it
- Evolving Concepts of the SCORE System: Subtracting Cholesterol from Risk Estimation: A Way for a Healthy Longevity?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Impact of Active vs Passive Statin Selection for Primary Prevention: The CorCal Vanguard Trial.JACC. Advances · 2023Article
- Alcohol intake, smoking, self-medication practices and burden of anaemia among traders in Tamale metropolis of Ghana.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- Recent Trends in Cardiovascular Disease Mortality in Kazakhstan.Vascular health and risk management · 2023Article
- Lifestyle factors and psychological well-being: 10-year follow-up study in Lithuanian urban population.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Metolazone Add-On Therapy in Heart Failure: A Cohort Study from Persian Registry of Cardiovascular Disease/Heart Failure (PROVE/HF).Critical care research and practice · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDespite recent improvements in the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in the UK, deaths from CVD are relatively high compared with other high-income countries. An estimated 7 million people in the UK are living with CVD, and the healthcare cost is approximately £11 billion annually. In more than 90% of cases, the risk of a first heart attack is thought to be related to modifiable risk factors including smoking, poor diet, lipidemia, high blood pressure, inactivity, obesity and excess alcohol consumption. The aim of the study is to synthesise evidence for the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different interventions for the primary prevention of CVD.
methodsWe will systematically search databases (for example, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cochrane Library) and the reference lists of previous systematic reviews for randomised controlled trials that assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of any form of intervention aimed at adult populations for the primary prevention of CVD, including but not limited to lipid lowering medications, blood pressure lowering medications, antiplatelet agents, nutritional supplements, dietary interventions, health promotion programmes, physical activity interventions or structural and policy interventions. Interventions may or may not be targeted at high-risk groups. Publications from any year will be considered for inclusion. The primary outcome will be all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes will be cardiovascular diseases related mortality, major cardiovascular events, coronary heart disease, incremental costs per quality-adjusted life years gained. If data permits, we will use network meta-analysis to compare and rank effectiveness of different interventions, and test effect modification of intervention effectiveness using subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses. DISCUSSION: The results will be important for policymakers when making decisions between multiple possible alternative strategies to prevent CVD. Compared to results from existing multiple separate pairwise meta-analyses, this overarching synthesis of all relevant work will enhance decision-making. The findings will be crucial to inform evidence-based priorities and guidelines for policies and planning prevention strategies of CVD. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019123940.
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.