ArticleBMJ open2025
Predictive value of monocytes for coronary heart disease in Chinese adults: a population-based cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe development of simple tools to identify individuals at high risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) would enable rapid implementation of preventive measures. This study was designed to construct predictive models and scoring systems for CHD using monocyte count and its ratio to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) (MHR).
designPopulation-based prospective cohort study.
settingThe Shanghai Suburban Adult Cohort and Biobank (SSACB). PARTICIPANTS AND OUTCOME MEASURES: This prospective study included 44 013 CHD-free participants of the SSACB. The Songjiang subcohort served as the training set, in which three predictive models and corresponding scoring systems were developed with monocyte count or MHR using stepwise Cox regression. The models and algorithms were tested internally using 10-fold cross-validation and externally in the Jiading subcohort. Discriminations were assessed based on area under the curve (AUC) values, while calibrations were evaluated using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test.
resultsDuring a mean follow-up period of 4.8 years, 883 CHD events occurred, with an incidence of 415.7/100 000. Monocyte count and MHR were significantly associated with the risk of CHD. The constructed model incorporating monocyte count (Model 2) achieved AUC values of 0.746 (0.726, 0.766) for 4-year CHD prediction in the training set, 0.746 (0.690, 0.796) in the cross-validation, and 0.717 (0.674, 0.761) in the external validation, comparable to the models including HDL-C (model 1) or MHR (model 3). Calibration plots demonstrated good agreement between predicted and actual probabilities. Similar results were observed for the corresponding scoring algorithms.
conclusionsThe monocyte-based model is a simple, low-cost and well-calibrated risk-stratification tool for CHD. However, the declined discrimination in external validation indicates limited generalisability. Prospective multicentre validation and recalibration are therefore warranted before clinical adoption.
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.