ArticleBJGP open2021
The impact of the new Dutch guideline on cardiovascular risk management in patients with COPD: a retrospective study.
Article in BJGP open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Methods to assess atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in chronic respiratory diseases: a systematic review.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2025Pooled it
- Using machine learning to predict acute myocardial infarction and ischemic heart disease in primary care cardiovascular patients.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPatients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have an independent increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. Cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment should be offered to all patients with COPD, according to the new Dutch CVR management (CVRM) guideline (May 2019).
aimTo evaluate the impact of the new CVRM guideline on the care of patients with COPD in primary care. DESIGN &
settingA retrospective study took place within five primary healthcare centres located in The Netherlands.
methodIn accordance with the guideline, the CVR of all patients with COPD was estimated and categorised. Data from 2014-2019 were used for the qualitative risk assessment based on comorbidities, and the quantitative Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE). In addition, the guideline-based follow-up was investigated.
resultsOf the 391 patients with COPD, 84.1% (
conclusionWhereas in the majority of patients with COPD the CVR is already known, for one out of six patients this CVR still has to be assessed according to the recently updated guideline. Moreover, once a (very) high risk has been assessed, as a consequence CV treatment of risk factors should be intensified in one out of four patients with COPD. Adherence to the new CVRM guideline could provide improvement in CVRM in more than a third of all patients with COPD.
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.