ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2022
Impact of a Patient's Baseline Risk on the Relative Benefit and Harm of a Preventive Treatment Strategy: Applying Trial Results in Clinical Decision Making.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2022. 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.
- Effects of icosapent ethyl according to baseline residual risk in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: results from REDUCE-IT.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2024Trial
- Temporal trends in acute decompensated heart failure outcomes: A single-center 11-year retrospective analysis.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2024Article
- Using Automated Machine Learning to Predict Necessary Upcoming Therapy Changes in Patients With Psoriasis Vulgaris and Psoriatic Arthritis and Uncover New Influences on Disease Progression: Retrospective Study.JMIR formative research · 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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background For translating an overall trial result into an individual patient's expected absolute treatment effect, differences in relative treatment effect between patients need to be taken into account. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether relative treatment effects of medication in 2 large contemporary trials are influenced by multivariable baseline risk of an individual patient. Methods and Results In 9361 patients from SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial), risk of major adverse cardiovascular events was assessed using a newly derived risk model. In 18 133 patients from the RE-LY (Randomized Evaluation of Long-Term Anticoagulant Therapy) trial, risk of stroke or systemic embolism and major bleeding was assessed using the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the Field-Atrial Fibrillation risk model. Heterogeneity of trial treatment effect was assessed using Cox models of trial allocation, model linear predictor, and their interaction. There was no significant interaction between baseline risk and relative treatment effect from intensive blood pressure lowering in SPRINT (
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.