Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39076676›Full record

ReviewReviews in cardiovascular medicine2022

Anthropometric Measures and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease: Is there an Opportunity for Non-Traditional Anthropometric Assessment? A Review.

Aurora Carrión-Martínez, Benjamin J R Buckley, Esteban Orenes-Piñero, Francisco Marín, Gregory Y H Lip, José Miguel Rivera-Caravaca

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Prognostic significance of anthropometric measurements in gastric cancer: a multicenter cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  10. Position Statement on Cardiometabolic Health Across the Woman's Life Course - 2025.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

6 authors.

Aurora Carrión-MartínezDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, University of Murcia, Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria (IMIB-Arrixaca), CIBERCV, 30120 Murcia, Spain.
Benjamin J R BuckleyLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK.
Esteban Orenes-PiñeroDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology-A, University of Murcia, Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria (IMIB-Arrixaca), CIBERCV, 30120 Murcia, Spain.
Francisco MarínDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, University of Murcia, Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria (IMIB-Arrixaca), CIBERCV, 30120 Murcia, Spain.
Gregory Y H LipLiverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science at University of Liverpool, Liverpool John Moores University and Liverpool Heart & Chest Hospital, L14 3PE Liverpool, UK.
José Miguel Rivera-CaravacaDepartment of Cardiology, Hospital Clínico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca, University of Murcia, Instituto Murciano de Investigación Biosanitaria (IMIB-Arrixaca), CIBERCV, 30120 Murcia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Several anthropometric measurements are used to assess cardiovascular risk and progress during clinical treatment. Most commonly used anthropometric measurements include total body weight and body mass index (BMI), with several other simple anthropometric measures typically underused in clinical practice. Herein, we review the evidence on the relationship between different anthropometric measurements and cardiovascular risk in patients with and without cardiovascular disease (CVD). Methods: Data for this review were identified by searches in PubMed, the Web of Science, Google Scholar, and references from relevant articles by using appropriate and related terms. The last search was performed on June 22, 2022. Articles published in English and Spanish were reviewed and included, if appropriate. We included studies detailing the relationship between skinfolds thickness, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and Conicity index with cardiovascular risk in adults with/without CVD. Results: In patients from the general population, elevated subscapular and triceps skinfolds showed a positive relationship with the development of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, hypercholesterolemia, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. A higher subscapular skinfold was also associated with increased risk of coronary artery disease and stroke. A higher WHR, as well as other less common anthropometric measurements such as the Conicity index, was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, incident CVD, major adverse cardiovascular events, and mortality in both patients with and without previous CVD. Conclusions: Non-traditional anthropometric measurements including skinfolds and WHR seem to improve the prediction of cardiovascular risk in the general population, and recurrent events in patients with previous CVD. Use of additional anthropometric techniques according to an objective and standardized method, may aid cardiovascular risk stratification in patients from the general population and the evaluation of therapeutic interventions for patients with CVD.

Indexed as

body weights and measuresdiabeteshypertensionkinanthropometrymyocardial infarctionstroke

Identifiers

PMID39076676
PMCPMC11270468

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.