Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32690512›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Estimation of total cardiovascular risk using the 2019 WHO CVD prediction charts and comparison of population-level costs based on alternative drug therapy guidelines: a population-based study of adults in Bangladesh.

Jessica Yasmine Islam, M Mostafa Zaman, Mohammad Moniruzzaman, Shawkat Ara Shakoor, A H M Enayet Hossain

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Major Limitations of Cardiovascular Risk Scores.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Jessica Yasmine IslamNon-Communicable Disease Program, World Health Organization Country Office for Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh islamjy@email.unc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3690-3848
M Mostafa ZamanNon-Communicable Disease Program, World Health Organization Country Office for Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Mohammad MoniruzzamanDepartment of Public Health, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-2144-7111
Shawkat Ara ShakoorNational Institute of Opthalmology, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
A H M Enayet HossainNational Institute of Opthalmology, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Shiga University of Medical Science · JPUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USWorld University of Bangladesh · BD

Funding

World Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to estimate the population distribution of 10-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk among Bangladeshi adults aged 40 years and above, using the 2019 WHO CVD risk prediction charts. Additionally, we compared the cost of CVD pharmacological treatment based on the total CVD risk (thresholds ≥30%/≥20%) and the single risk factor (hypertension) cut-off levels in the Bangladeshi context. STUDY

designCross-sectional, population-based study. SETTING AND

participantsFrom 2013 to 2014, we collected data from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey of adults aged ≥40 years from urban and rural areas of Bangladesh (n=6189). We estimated CVD risk using the 2019 WHO CVD risk prediction charts and categorised as very low (<5%), low (5% to <10%), moderate (10% to <20%), high (20% to <30%) and very high risk (≥30%). We estimated drug therapy costs using the lowest price of each drug class available (aspirin, thiazide diuretics, statins and ACE inhibitors). We compared the total cost of drug therapy using the total CVD risk versus single risk factor approach. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was 10-year CVD risk categorised as very low (<5%), low (5% to <10%), moderate (10% to <20%), high (20% to <30%) and very high risk (≥30%).

resultsThe majority of adults (85.2%, 95% CI 84.3 to 86.1) have a 10-year CVD risk of less than 10%. The proportion of adults with a 10-year CVD risk of ≥20% was 0.51%. Only one adult was categorised with a 10-year CVD risk of ≥30%. Among adults with CVD risk groups of very low, low and moderate, 17.4%, 27.9% and 41.4% had hypertension (blood pressure (BP) ≥140/90) and 0.1%, 1.7% and 2.9% had severe hypertension (BP ≥160/100), respectively. Using the total CVD risk approach would reduce drug costs per million populations to US$144 540 (risk of ≥20%).

conclusionTo reduce healthcare expenditure for the prevention and treatment of CVD, a total risk approach using the 2019 WHO CVD risk prediction charts may lead to cost savings.

Indexed as

Heart Disease Risk FactorsAdultAgedBangladeshCardiovascular DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesDrug CostsFemaleHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedRisk Assessmentcardiac epidemiologyepidemiologyhypertensionischaemic heart diseasemyocardial infarction

Identifiers

PMID32690512
PMCPMC7371224
OpenAlexW3042333278

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.