Key result
Having ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors was associated with 50% lower odds of having coronary artery calcium >100 Agatston units (95% CI 0.34-0.72) compared to having <3 factors.
Why the study?
Does achieving ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors improve markers of subclinical cardiovascular disease in a community-based cohort?
Population
1933 participants from the Heart Strategies Concentrating on Risk Evaluation study, mean age 59, 34% male…
Comparison
Achieving ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors vs Achieving <3 ideal CVH factors
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Supports CVH promotion for prevention; extends observational data on subclinical markers but leaves causality open.
Cross-Sectional (n=1,933)
Does achieving ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors improve markers of subclinical cardiovascular disease in a community-based cohort?
Odds Ratio: 0.5 (95% CI 0.34–0.72)
Achieving three or more ideal cardiovascular health factors is associated with a significantly lower burden of subclinical cardiovascular disease, supporting its utility in disease prevention.
Shpilsky et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Subclinical cardiovascular disease (n=1,933). ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors vs. <3 ideal cardiovascular health factors was evaluated on Coronary artery calcium >100 Agatston units (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.72). Having ≥3 ideal cardiovascular health factors was associated with 50% lower odds of having coronary artery calcium >100 Agatston units (95% CI 0.34-0.72) compared to having <3 factors.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: