SynthesisPloS one2025
Gallstones as a predictor of elevated cardiovascular disease risk: A meta-analysis and meta-regression of over 7.4 million participants.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between albumin-bilirubin score and gallstones: exploring the potential mediating role of body mass index based on NHANES 2017-2020.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Article
- Non-linear association of cardiometabolic index with gallstone disease in US adults: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGallstone disease (GD) is a prevalent condition frequently encountered in surgical units worldwide. The objective of this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis study was to examine the relationship between gallstones and the risk of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs).
methodsTo conduct our study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We gathered relevant studies from reputable databases, including Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Embase. The quality of the articles was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale checklist. To assess heterogeneity among the studies, we utilized statistical tests such as the Chi-square test, I² statistic, and forest plots. Meta-regression analysis considered variables such as the year of the study, study design, sample size, study quality assessment score, geographical region, average age of subjects, and follow-up duration. Additionally, we evaluated publication bias using Begg's and Egger's tests.
resultsData from 22 studies conducted between 1985 and 2023 were analyzed. The combined number of participants across these studies was 7,496,303. The meta-analysis results revealed that individuals with GD had a higher risk of CVDs (Risk Ratio (RR): 1.29; 95% CI: 1.22-1.36; P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed consistent results across good quality studies (RR: 1.20, 95% CI: 11.12-1.28; P < 0.001), moderate quality studies (RR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.15-1.74; P < 0.001), and low-quality studies (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.15-1.30; P < 0.001). In the meta-regression analysis, none of the variables had a significant relationship with the observed heterogeneity (P-value > 0.10). In a sensitivity analysis, the estimated RR remained consistent, confirming the robustness of the meta-analysis results.
conclusionOur findings suggest an association between gallstone disease and an increased risk of CVDs. It seems that one of the important factors of this relationship is having common causes for the formation of gallstones and cardiovascular diseases. However, gallstones can be considered an important sign of increased risk of cardiovascular diseases.
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.