Key result
A systematic review identified 18 studies evaluating health promotion and primary prevention interventions for cardiovascular disease in Argentina, with most having a moderate or high risk of bias.
Why the study?
No reviews describing local studies on interventions to address cardiovascular disease risk factors in Argentina had been identified.
Do population-based interventions and public policies improve cardiovascular health and reduce CVD risk factors in adult populations in Argentina?
Systematic Review (n=18)
Do population-based interventions and public policies improve cardiovascular health and reduce CVD risk factors in adult populations in Argentina?
This systematic review highlights a lack of high-quality evidence for community-based cardiovascular health promotion in Argentina, with most available studies showing moderate to high risk of bias.
Insufficient high-quality evidence limits CVD prevention guidance in Argentina; leaves open whether population interventions improve cardiovascular health.
In Argentina, cardiovascular disease (CVD) accounts for 30% of deaths and more than 600 000 disability-adjusted life years. However, no reviews describing local studies on interventions to address CVD risk factors have been identified. The purpose of this study is to characterize those population-based interventions and public policies implemented in Argentina to reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease with an adequate evaluation of their impact on population health. We conducted a systematic review of studies that assessed interventions in health promotion and/or primary prevention conducted in adult populations of Argentina, addressing specific CVD factors, from 1999 to 2016. We searched major bibliographic databases, grey literature, ministries and secretariats of health, and academic national libraries. Key informants, non-governmental organizations, universities, hospitals and experts were also contacted. We applied specific inclusion criteria. We assessed the methodological quality of the studies and reported the effectiveness and impact of population interventions and policies, as well as process evaluations' characteristics. After removing duplicates we identified 1686 references from databases. After reviewing title and abstracts 18 studies were selected, five of them corresponded to evaluations of public policies-all addressing tobacco smoking. We presented a structured review of each experience. Most of the studies were deemed to entail moderate or high risk of bias. We summarized the findings and characteristics of these studies, including implementation strategies, process and impact evaluation. This is the first systematic review of interventions focused on primary prevention and health promotion to counter CVD and diabetes in Argentina.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bardach et al. (2016) conducted a systematic review in Cardiovascular disease (n=18). Health promotion and primary prevention interventions was evaluated on Effectiveness and impact of population interventions and policies. A systematic review identified 18 studies evaluating health promotion and primary prevention interventions for cardiovascular disease in Argentina, with most having a moderate or high risk of bias.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: