ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Cardiovascular Disease Screening Programs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Assessment of cardiopulmonary resuscitation skills using a clinical simulation approach among emergency medical personnel of the Kerman Emergency and Incident Management Center.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading global cause of mortality and disproportionately affects low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Although screening is essential for prevention and early detection, its effectiveness and implementation in LMICs remain unclear.
objectivesThe objective of the study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance, detection yield, and linkage-to-care outcomes of CVD and major cardiometabolic risk-factor screening programs in LMICs.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines (PROSPERO, CRD420251241426). Databases were searched through November 2025. Observational and interventional studies assessing cardiovascular or major cardiometabolic screening programs in LMICs were included. Primary outcomes were detection rates and linkage to care. Secondary outcomes included risk-factor control, cardiovascular events, mortality, and cost-effectiveness. Owing to heterogeneity, results were synthesized narratively.
resultsSeventeen studies from Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America were included. Screening approaches comprised risk-prediction models, point-of-care testing, community health worker-led programs, and mobile health platforms. Diagnostic performance ranged from area under the curve 0.64 to 0.91. Locally adapted risk models generally outperformed imported scores, whereas simplified tools showed acceptable discrimination. Screening identified a substantial burden of undiagnosed disease, with up to 55% meeting hypertension criteria and approximately 40% classified as high risk for diabetes. However, considerable attrition occurred across the care cascade, with preventive service uptake ranging from 15% to 58% and confirmatory testing as low as 22%. Community health worker-led programs demonstrated >90% sensitivity and specificity compared with clinician assessment.
conclusionsCVD screening programs in LMICs can effectively identify unmet cardiometabolic risk, but weak linkage to care limits impact. Strengthening integrated screening-to-treatment pathways is essential to improve outcomes.
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.