ArticleBJGP open2025
Quality indicators for lifestyle or behavioural management for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in primary care: a systematic review.
Article in BJGP open, 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.
- Cardiac Diseases in Sudan 1970-2025: Current Situation and Future Prospects.European cardiology · 2026Review
- Management capacity for stable coronary heart disease in Shanghai community medical institutions: a cross-sectional study.BMC health services research · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMonitoring lifestyle or behavioural risk factors using quality indicators is critical for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
aimTo summarise indicators for monitoring lifestyle risk factors for the primary prevention of CVD. DESIGN &
settingA systematic review of quality indicators in primary care.
methodFour research databases (Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, CINAHL Plus, and Scopus) and grey literature were searched to identify articles (indicator sets) used to monitor lifestyle risk factors. Articles were assessed for methodological quality using the Appraisal of Indicators through Research and Evaluation (AIRE) instrument. Articles with strong methodological quality, scoring ≥50% in each domain (that is, relevance, stakeholder involvement, scientific evidence, and usage) were included. Indicators were categorised into assessment of lifestyle risk factors or advice on healthy lifestyle.
resultsWe identified 39/282 (14%) articles including indicators to monitor lifestyle risk factors from a full-text review. Of these, 19 (49%) articles with strong methodological quality, comprising 90 unique indicators, were included. Most of the indicators were on assessing smoking status (21%), body weight (18%), advice on smoking cessation (13%), immunisation (9%), and advice on physical activity (8%). Assessment of alcohol consumption (3%) and healthy eating (2%) were the least reported. When comparing assessment versus advice indicators, we found gaps in monitoring smoking status (41% assessment versus 27% advice) and body weight (35% versus 14%). Notably, there were more indicators for advice on (16%) than assessment of (4%) healthy eating.
conclusionWe identified several indicators for the monitoring of lifestyle risk factors. However, there is a need to ensure an appropriate mix of indicators on assessment versus advice.
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.