ArticleJournal of mid-life health
Nontraditional Lipid Parameters as a Predictor of Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Nepalese Women.
Article in Journal of mid-life health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The use of nontraditional lipid parameters for assessing clinical conditions is emerging; however, no study has identified thresholds for those parameters for the identification of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. The present study aimed to establish the thresholds of nontraditional lipid parameters and test its ability to identify CVD risk factors. Methodology: A cross-sectional study in women ( Results: Based on TC (≥200 mg/dL), the derived thresholds for non-HDL-C, CRI-II, CRI-I, LCI, AI, and AIP were 139 mg/dL, 2.29, 3.689, 58,066, 2.687, and 0.487, respectively. Similarly, based on the threshold of TG (≥150 mg/dL), the derived thresholds for non-HDL-C, CRI-II, CRI-I, LCI, AI, and AIP were 127 mg/dL, 2.3, 3.959, 58,251, 2.959, and 0.467, respectively. Out of considered five risk factors, non-HDL-C, CRI-II, CRI-I, LCI, and AI thresholds were capable in identifying four risk factors (physical activity, blood pressure, BMI, and age) and AIP was able to associate with two risk factors at most (blood pressure and BMI). Conclusion: The derived thresholds of nontraditional lipid parameters were capable of differentiating between CVD risk and nonrisk groups suggesting the possible use of these thresholds for studying CVD risk.
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.