Trial reportJournal of epidemiology and community health1994
Randomised controlled trial in northern England of the effect of a person knowing their own serum cholesterol concentration.
Trial report in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 1994. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.BMC health services research · 2008Pooled it
- 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
- Article
- Using body mass index data in the electronic health record to calculate cardiovascular risk.American journal of preventive medicine · 2012Article
- Cholesterol and coronary heart disease: screening and treatment.Quality in health care : QHC · 1998Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SUBJECT
objectiveTo test the hypotheses that the knowledge that the serum cholesterol concentration is raised (> or = 6.5 mmol/l) will lead to a reduction in the concentration after education intervention and that the knowledge that the concentration is not raised does not lead to an increase in the serum cholesterol concentration after education intervention.
designProspective randomised trial, with investigators blind to the randomisation.
settingAn industrial site in Manchester, England.
participantsA total of 495 employees of Imperial Chemical Industries, 469 of whom completed the trial. MAIN
resultThere was a significant reduction in the serum cholesterol concentration of those whose initial concentration was > or = 6.5 mmol/l and who were given the result. This reduction was 0.28 mmol/l greater than in the control group. The reduction was similar, however, to the increase in the serum cholesterol concentration in those whose initial concentration was < 5.2 mmol/l, regardless of whether or not they had been given the result.
conclusionThese results support the hypotheses, although the lack of regression to the mean in the control group with high serum cholesterol suggests that this conclusion should be treated with caution.
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.