ArticleEuropean heart journal open2023
Disparities in the non-laboratory INTERHEART risk score and its components in selected countries of Europe and sub-Saharan Africa: analysis from the SPICES multi-country project.
Article in European heart journal open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating modifiable hypertension risk in Nigerian adults-The Nigerian diet risk score.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Accurate prediction of a person's risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is vital to initiate appropriate intervention. The non-laboratory INTERHEART risk score (NL-IHRS) is among the tools to estimate future risk of CVD. However, measurement disparities of the tool across contexts are not well documented. Thus, we investigated variation in NL-IHRS and components in selected sub-Saharan African and European countries. Methods and results: We used data from a multi-country study involving 9309 participants, i.e. 4941 in Europe, 3371 in South Africa, and 997 in Uganda. Disparities in total NL-IHRS score, specific subcomponents, subcategories, and their contribution to the total score were investigated. The variation in the adjusted total and component scores was compared across contexts using analysis of variance. The adjusted mean NL-IHRS was higher in South Africa (10.2) and Europe (10.0) compared to Uganda (8.2), and the difference was statistically significant ( Conclusion: The total risk score, subcomponents, categories, and their contribution to total score greatly vary across contexts, which could be due to disparities in risk burden and/or self-reporting bias in resource-limited settings. Therefore, primary preventive initiatives should identify risk factor burden across contexts and intervention activities need to be customized accordingly. Furthermore, contextualizing the risk assessment tool and evaluating its usefulness in different settings are recommended.
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.