Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34462328›Full record

ArticleOpen heart2021

Change in cardiovascular risk assessment tool and updated Norwegian guidelines for cardiovascular disease in primary prevention increase the population proportion at risk: the Tromsø Study 2015-2016.

Amalie Nilsen, Tove Aminda Hanssen, Knut Tore Lappegård, Anne Elise Eggen, Maja-Lisa Løchen, Randi Marie Selmer, Inger Njølstad, Tom Wilsgaard, Laila A Hopstock

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Open heart, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Amalie NilsenDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway amalie.nilsen@uit.no.ORCID 0000-0002-7462-4778
Tove Aminda HanssenDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital of North Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Knut Tore LappegårdDepartment of Medicine, Nordlands Hospital, Bodo, Norway.
Anne Elise EggenDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Maja-Lisa LøchenDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-8532-6573
Randi Marie SelmerDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Modelling, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Inger NjølstadDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Tom WilsgaardDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Laila A HopstockDepartment of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
UiT The Arctic University of Norway · NOUniversity Hospital of North Norway · NONorwegian Institute of Public Health · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo compare the population proportion at high risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) using the Norwegian NORRISK 1 that predicts 10-year risk of CVD mortality and the Norwegian national guidelines from 2009, with the updated NORRISK 2 that predicts 10-year risk of both fatal and non-fatal risk of CVD and the Norwegian national guidelines from 2017.

methodsWe included participants from the Norwegian population-based Tromsø Study (2015-2016) aged 40-69 years without a history of CVD (n=16 566). The total proportion eligible for intervention was identified by NORRISK 1 and the 2009 guidelines (serum total cholesterol ≥8 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥100 mm Hg) and NORRISK 2 and the 2017 guidelines (serum total cholesterol ≥7 mmol/L, low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol ≥5 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic blood pressure ≥100 mm Hg).

resultsThe total proportion at high risk as defined by a risk score was 12.0% using NORRISK 1 and 9.8% using NORRISK 2. When including single risk factors specified by the guidelines, the total proportion eligible for intervention was 15.5% using NORRISK 1 and the 2009 guidelines and 18.9% using NORRISK 2 and the 2017 guidelines. The lowered threshold for total cholesterol and specified cut-off for LDL cholesterol stand for a large proportion of the increase in population at risk.

conclusionThe population proportion eligible for intervention increased by 3.4 percentage points from 2009 to 2017 using the revised NORRISK 2 score and guidelines.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicAdultCardiovascular DiseasesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedMorbidityNorwayPopulation SurveillancePrimary PreventionPrognosisRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSurvival Ratecoronary artery diseaseepidemiologyrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID34462328
PMCPMC8407203
OpenAlexW3198878794

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.