ReviewClinical cardiology2000
Class effects and evidence-based medicine.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring neurokinin-1 receptor antagonism for depression with structurally differentiated inhibitors.Experimental & molecular medicine · 2025Article
- Sodium Glucose Co-Transporter 2 Inhibitors and the Cardiovascular System: Current Knowledge and Future Expectations.Heart international · 2023Review
- Sodium-glucose transporter-2 inhibitors for prevention and treatment of cardiorenal complications of type 2 diabetes.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2021Review
- Class effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on cardiorenal outcomes.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2019Review
- Class effect for SGLT-2 inhibitors: a tale of 9 drugs.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2019Article
- Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products and Exemptions to the Regulation 1394/2007: How Confident Can We be? An Exploratory Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2012Article
- Effectiveness of statins for secondary prevention in elderly patients after acute myocardial infarction: an evaluation of class effect.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2005Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drugs grouped into a therapeutic class on the basis of a common mechanism of action often have considerably different pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties. Among angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, differences with potential clinical relevance include potency, whether the drug is an active compound or requires metabolic activation, lipophilicity, route(s) of elimination, and half-life. Large clinical trials have documented the clinical benefits of several ACE inhibitors in various patient populations, and many clinical effects of ACE inhibitors are likely to be the same. However, there are possible quantitative differences among ACE inhibitors that may alter the overall therapeutic benefits for specific patient populations and indications. Equipotency in terms of clinical efficacy is difficult to determine. Since the concept of "class effect" is a term of convenience that has no universally accepted definition and subsequently should not form the basis for the practice of evidence-based medicine, untested drugs of a "class" should be considered to be unproven drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.