ArticleAnnals of medicine2021
Effects of data preprocessing on results of the epidemiological analysis of coronary heart disease and behaviour-related risk factors.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2021. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimized machine learning framework for cardiovascular disease diagnosis: a novel ethical perspective.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2025Article
- The effect of individual exercise rehabilitation program on ischemic burden and cardiac function in patients with ischemic non-obstructive coronary heart disease: a randomized parallel controlled clinical trial.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Epidemiological analysis of coronary heart disease and its main risk factors: are their associations multiplicative, additive, or interactive?Annals of medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Does Cardiovascular Disease Risk Decrease after Smoking Cessation in Occupational Risk Groups?Heart views : the official journal of the Gulf Heart AssociationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe carried out this study to demonstrate the effects of outcome sensitivity, participant exclusions, and covariate manipulations on results of the epidemiological analysis of coronary heart disease (CHD) and its behaviour-related risk factors. MATERIAL AND
methodsOur study population consisted of 1592 54-year-old men, who participated in the Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor (KIHD) Study. We used the Cox proportional-hazards model to predict the hazard of CHD and applied different sets of outcomes concerning outcome sensitivity and data preprocessing procedures regarding participant exclusions and covariate manipulations.
resultsThe mean follow-up time was 23 years, and 730 men received the CHD diagnosis. Cox regressions based on data with no participant exclusions most often discovered statistically significant associations. Loose inclusion criteria for study participants with any CVD during the follow-up and strict exclusion criteria for participants with no CVD were best in discovering the associations between risk factors and CHD. Outcome sensitivity affected the associations, whereas the covariate type, continuous or categorical, did not.
conclusionsThis study suggests that excluding study participants who are not disease-free at baseline is probably unnecessary for epidemiological analyses. Epidemiological research reports should present results based on no data exclusions together with results based on reasoned exclusions.
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.