ArticleCJC open2020
The Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds: How Well Does It Reflect the Canadian Population?
Article in CJC open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Who thrives in Canada? An Examination of social factors, healthcare access, and immigration status.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Exposure to air pollutants and subclinical carotid atherosclerosis measured by magnetic resonance imaging: A cross-sectional analysis.PloS one · 2024Article
- Cohort Profile: The Ontario Health Study (OHS).International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors at 14 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe intent of the Canadian Alliance for Healthy Hearts and Minds (CAHHM) cohort is to understand the early determinants of subclinical cardiac and vascular disease and progression in adults selected from existing cohorts-the Canadian Partnership for Tomorrow's Health, the Prospective Urban and Rural Evaluation (PURE) cohort, and the Montreal Heart Institute Biobank. We evaluated how well the CAHHM-Health Services Research (CAHHM-HSR) subcohort reflects the Canadian population.
methodsA cross-sectional design was used among a prospective cohort of community-dwelling adults aged 35-69 years who met the CAHHM inclusion criteria, and a cohort of adults aged 35-69 years who responded to the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Rapid Response module. The INTERHEART risk score was calculated at the individual level with means and proportions reported at the overall and provincial level.
resultsThere are modest differences between CAHHM-HSR study participants and the 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey-Rapid Response respondents in age (56.3 vs 51.7 mean years), proportion of men (44.9% vs 49.3%), and mean INTERHEART risk score (9.7 vs 10.1). Larger differences were observed in postsecondary education (86.8% vs 70.2%), Chinese ethnicity (11.0% vs 3.3%), obesity (23.2% vs 29.3%), current smoker status (6.1% vs 18.4%), and having no cardiac testing (30.4% vs 55.9%).
conclusionsCAHHM-HSR participants are older, of higher socioeconomic status, and have a similar mean INTERHEART risk score, compared with participants in the Canadian Community Health Survey. Differing sampling strategies and missing data may explain some differences between the CAHHM-HSR cohort and Canadian community-dwelling adults and should be considered when using the CAHHM-HSR for scientific research.
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.