ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2025
Income, education, and the clustering of risk in cardiovascular disease in the US, 1999-2018: an observational study.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preliminary trial findings from Harvest Share: a cost-offset community supported agriculture model to improve diet in New York City.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Trial
- "I'd Probably Be Homeless": Basic Income Participants' Lived Experiences Related to Housing Stability, Health, and Wellbeing.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Affordable care act and 4-year all-cause mortality among U.S. working-age adults with or without cancer: 2000-2015.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Binational comparison of the association between socioeconomic status and metabolic syndrome: A nationally representative study in South Korea and the United States.Preventive medicine reports · 2025Article
- Echoes of Inequity: A Critical Examination of the Past, Present, and Future of Cardiac Health Equity.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health metrics in the United States (US) have lagged behind other high-income countries in recent decades, and show persistent gaps between socio-demographic groups. Top 20% income earners and college graduates have also increasingly diverged from the reminder of the population in various dimensions over the past few decades. This study described population patterns in cardiovascular diseases (CVD) by income and education over a twenty-year period. Methods: This analysis used nationally representative data from 10 cycles (1999-2018) of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Participants were stratified by income and education into four groups: top 20% income earners, college graduates; top 20% income earners, non-college graduates; bottom 80% income earners, college graduates; and bottom 80% income earners, non-college graduates. For income, we created a binary variable (ratio > 5 cutoff) using NHANES income-to-poverty ratio variable to create a standardized measure of income. We calculated the age-standardized prevalence and odds ratios of four conditions: congestive heart failure (CHF), angina, heart attack, and stroke, for each income-education group. Findings: 49,704 participants reported data for both income and education. The age-standardized prevalence of CVD outcomes varied across the four groups. This was most significant when comparing the prevalence among the top 20% income, college graduate group to the bottom 80% income, non-college graduate group: CHF (0.5% vs. 3.0%), angina (1.4% vs. 2.8%), heart attack (1.7% vs. 3.9%), and stroke (1.1% vs. 3.4%). Compared to the top 20% income, college graduate group, the odds of all CVD conditions were significantly higher in the bottom 80% income groups (college graduates: odds ratios (ORs) 1.48-3.67; non-college graduates: ORs 2.36-6.52), as well as for CHF and heart attack in the top 20% income, non-college graduates (OR 3.11 [95% CI: 1.92, 5.06] and OR 1.92 [95% CI: 1.35, 2.73], respectively). Interpretation: Health gaps extend beyond extremes, with risk clustering favoring top 20% income earners with college degrees while most Americans are left behind. Future research should include longitudinal studies that focus on the mechanisms through which both income and education intersect to shape CVD outcomes in the US. Funding: The Rockefeller Foundation.
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.