ArticlePloS one2025
Cardiovascular risk in aging adults with double deficits in social support: A gender-sensitive, cross-sectional analysis of the CLSA cohort.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSynergistic effects of diverse social supports (informational, tangible, emotional and belonging) on cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVRF), by gender, is unknown.
aimTo quantify gender differences in the singular and combined associations of four different forms of social support with cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVRF) in aging adults.
methodsCross-sectional study of 28,779 adults (45-85 years) in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging Comprehensive cohort (2011-15); independent variables were self-reported measures of informational, tangible, emotional and belonging support; dependent variables were clinically measured BMI, waist circumference and blood pressure. We used stratified multivariable linear and logistic regression with principal component regression with cross-product terms to post-estimate adjusted means and 95% CIs for combined associations.
resultsAll low-low support combinations were consistently associated with the highest adjusted mean BMI and WC levels among women. Adjusted mean BMI differences were largest among women with low informational and low tangible supports (27.95 kg/m2 [27.93, 27.97]), compared to women with high informational and high tangible supports (27.34 kg/m2 [27.30, 27.38]). Similarly, the greatest difference in adjusted mean WC was seen among women with low informational and low emotional supports (88.69 cm [88.62, 88.76]) compared to the high-high combination (86.88 cm [86.75, 87.01]). Women with low availability of informational support, with or without deficits in a second support type, had the highest adjusted mean SBP levels (range: 119.94 to 119.95 mmHg). Among men, mean CVRFs were not consistently worse for combinations of dual deficits in social support. Results were null for DBP.
conclusionWomen with two deficits in social supports, particularly combinations with low informational support, showed worse CVRF measures than one social support deficit. Results indicated no antagonistic/synergistic effects of social support on CVRFs. Heart health care and prevention for aging women would benefit from ensuring informational support with other supports is available.
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.