Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)1995
The impact of health care advice given in primary care on cardiovascular risk. CELL Study Group.
Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Risk scoring for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2013 · on this mapPooled it
- Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011Pooled it
- Statins for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2011 · on this mapPooled it
- Multiple risk factor interventions for primary prevention of coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2006Pooled it
- Dietary advice given by a dietitian versus other health professional or self-help resources to reduce blood cholesterol.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2001Pooled it
- Lifestyle Intervention on Metabolic Syndrome and its Impact on Quality of Life: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2017Trial
- A randomized trial to evaluate the effectiveness of dietary advice by practice nurses in lowering diet-related coronary heart disease risk.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1997Trial
- Observed changes in cardiovascular risk factors among high-risk middle-aged men who received lifestyle counselling: a 5-year follow-up.Scandinavian journal of primary health care · 2016Article
- Assessing quality of a worksite health promotion programme from participants' views: findings from a qualitative study in Malaysia.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2014Article
- Potentials and pitfalls for nutrition counselling in general practice.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2005Article
- Intensive cardiovascular risk factor intervention in a rural practice: a glimmer of hope?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 1998Article
- Advice on lifestyle dilutes important smoking message.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995Article
- Health checks in general practice.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1995Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the additional benefit of "intensive" health care advice through six group sessions, compared with the advice usually offered to subjects with multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease.
designProspective, randomised controlled clinical study lasting 18 months.
setting681 subjects aged 30-59 years, with at least two cardiovascular risk factors in addition to moderately high lipid concentrations: total cholesterol > or = 6.5 mmol/l on three occasions, triglycerides < 4.0 mmol/l, and ratio of low density lipoprotein cholesterol to high density lipoprotein cholesterol > 4.0. Most (577) of the subjects were men.
main outcome measurePercentage reduction in total cholesterol concentration (target 15%); quantification of the differences between the two types of health care advice (intensive v usual) for the Framingham cardiovascular risk and for individual risk factors.
resultsIn the group receiving intensive health care advice total cholesterol concentration decreased by 0.15 mmol/l more (95% confidence interval 0.04 to 0.26) than in the group receiving usual advice. The overall Framingham risk dropped by 0.068 more (0.014 to 0.095) in the group receiving intensive advice, and most of the risk factors showed a greater change in a favourable direction in this group than in the group receiving usual advice, but the differences were seldom significant. The results from questionnaires completed at the group sessions showed that the subjects improved their lifestyle and diet.
conclusionLimited additional benefit was gained from being in the group receiving the intensive health care advice. It is difficult to make an important impact on cardiovascular risk in primary care by using only the practice staff. Better methods of communicating the messages need to be devised.
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.