ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Cardiovascular risk assessed by the conicity index in Brazilian adults: findings from the national health survey.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anthropometric indices such as the Conicity Index (C-Index) are emerging as accessible tools to assess cardiovascular risk associated with central adiposity, a key determinant of cardiovascular disease burden in low and middle-income countries. Aim: To estimate the prevalence of cardiovascular risk using the CI and examine its association with sociodemographic and lifestyle factors in a nationally representative sample of Brazilian adults. Methods: In this cross-sectional study using data from the 2013 Brazilian National Health Survey ( Results: The overall prevalence of elevated cardiovascular risk was 39.6%, with a significantly higher rate among women (64.6%) compared to men (35.4%). Increased age, lower education, lower income, poor self-rated health, and physical inactivity were independently associated with greater cardiovascular risk, with regional and sex-based differences observed. Conclusion: The CI proved to be a practical, non-invasive measure strongly associated with key social determinants of health and behavioral risk factors. These findings support its integration into public health monitoring and preventive strategies to identify at-risk groups, particularly in resource-constrained settings.
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.