ArticleMetabolism open2026
Metabolic syndrome score and cardiovascular disease risk in adults with cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic syndrome stages 0-3: A prospective cohort study.
Article in Metabolism open, 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
Background: The American Heart Association (AHA) introduced the Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic (CKM) syndrome framework, emphasizing the interplay of metabolic risk factors, chronic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Whether the metabolic syndrome (MetS) score-a simple count of metabolic abnormalities-provides additional risk information within CKM stages 0-3 remains uncertain. This study examined the association between MetS score and incident CVD in a CHARLS-based cohort with CKM stages 0-3. Methods: We analyzed 7889 participants aged ≥45 years from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) with CKM stages 0-3 and no baseline CVD. CKM staging was corrected to enforce hierarchical consistency (participants with ≥2 MetS components were classified as at least Stage 2). MetS score (0-5) was defined per harmonized criteria. The primary outcome was incident CVD (self-reported heart disease or stroke) over 7-year follow-up. Cox proportional hazards models (with CKM stage in the primary model, without adjusting for MetS components), restricted cubic spline analyses, Modified Poisson regression, subgroup analyses, and sensitivity analyses were performed. Single iterative imputation addressed missing covariates (<3% per variable). Results: During median 7.0-year follow-up, 815 participants (10.3%) developed CVD. After full adjustment including CKM stage, each 1-point higher MetS score was associated with 22.3% higher CVD risk (HR: 1.223, 95% CI: 1.143-1.308, P < 0.001). The highest quartile had over twice the risk of the lowest (HR: 2.206, 95% CI: 1.625-2.996, P < 0.001; P for trend < 0.001). A categorical dose-response was confirmed (score 5 vs. 0: HR 3.379). The association was stronger for stroke (HR: 1.333) than heart disease (HR: 1.119; P for heterogeneity = 0.009). Adding MetS score to CKM stage significantly improved model fit (likelihood-ratio P < 0.001) but yielded modest discrimination improvement (ΔC-statistic: 0.017, 95% CI: 0.006-0.029). Results were robust across sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: In this CHARLS-based cohort of Chinese adults with CKM stages 0-3, a higher MetS score was independently associated with elevated CVD risk in a graded, dose-response manner. The MetS score captures cumulative metabolic burden beyond CKM staging, though its incremental discriminative value is modest. Further validation with adjudicated outcomes and accurate event timing is 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.