ArticleBMJ public health2026
Socioeconomic differences in the prevalence, treatment and control of major cardiometabolic risk factors by sex: a cross-sectional study of the UK Biobank.
Article in BMJ public health, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Social deprivation is related to cardiovascular risk, but the prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors by deprivation and sex is less explored. We addressed this in a large UK cohort. Methods: 500 769 UK Biobank participants (54.4% women) with ≥1 baseline risk factor measured were included. We examined differences in risk factors, including treatment and control, by socioeconomic status (Townsend score fifths) and sex. Results: Total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were lower with greater deprivation and systolic blood pressure was lower, while C-reactive protein was higher. Body mass index, waist circumference and triglycerides were also higher with greater deprivation, with larger differences in women than men. Corresponding social differences in glycated haemoglobin and glucose were higher in men than in women while estimated glomerular filtration rate was higher in men only. The prevalence of hypertension and chronic kidney disease was higher with greater deprivation (% difference between least and most deprived (95% CI 5.1 (4.7 to 5.6) and 0.9 (0.8 to 1.1), respectively), but varied by sex for smoking (12.1 (11.6 to 12.5) vs 15.4 (14.9 to 15.9) in women vs men, respectively), obesity (13.7 (13.1 to 14.2) vs 8.2 (7.7 to 8.8)) and diabetes (2.6 (2.3 to 2.8) vs 3.8 (3.4 to 4.1)). Treatment and control of hypertension and dyslipidaemia were higher with greater deprivation. Conclusions: Apart from total cholesterol and LDL-C, greater social deprivation relates to worse cardiometabolic risk factors. Social differences vary by sex for several risk factors, including higher smoking among men and obesity among women. Public health interventions considering both deprivation and sex are warranted.
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.