Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7913683›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology1994

Clinical trials versus clinical practice in the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction.

A Agustí, J M Arnau, J R Laporte

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A AgustíUnitat de Farmacologia Clínica, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, CSU Vall d'Hebron, Spain.
J M Arnau
J R Laporte
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To examine whether the results of trials on the secondary prevention of myocardial infarction have led to a change of prescription practice, the discharge forms of a random sample of 737 patients admitted to a university hospital with a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (MI) with Q wave from 1982 to 1988 were examined. Information about cardiovascular and other risk factors, contraindications, and prescription of beta-adrenoceptor antagonists (beta AA), acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and calcium channel blockers (CCB) was collected. The prescription of these drugs was analysed in relation to clinical variables and the date of patients' discharge from hospital. During the 7 years of follow-up, the prescription of beta AA increased gradually from 20% to 30-35%; the prescription of CCB was above 30% during the same period and did not change significantly with time. The prescription of ASA increased from 0% to 30-35% in the last 3 years of follow-up. Contraindications to beta AA were present in 23.2% of cases and contraindications to ASA in 14.4%. In a multivariate analysis, hypertension (odds ratio 2.29, 95% confidence interval 1.55-3.38) and the period 1986-1988 (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.57-3.30) were associated with the prescription of beta AA, although the prescription of beta AA decreased significantly with advancing age. Other variables inversely associated with the prescription of beta AA were contraindications (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24-0.66) and the presence of heart failure during admission (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03-0.20).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Indexed as

Clinical Trials as TopicAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAspirinCalcium Channel BlockersDrug UtilizationFemaleHospitals, UniversityHumansMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPractice Patterns, Physicians'SpainAdrenergic beta-AntagonistsAspirinCalcium Channel Blockers

Identifiers

PMID7913683
OpenAlexW2097081250

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.