ArticleLancet (London, England)2010
Balancing the benefits of statins versus a new risk-diabetes.
Article in Lancet (London, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- An integrative multiomic network model links lipid metabolism to glucose regulation in coronary artery disease.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Clinician-patient risk discussion for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention: importance to implementation of the 2013 ACC/AHA Guidelines.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2015Review
- Statins and risk of treated incident diabetes in a primary care population.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013Article
- Reexamining the declining effect of age on mortality differentials associated with excess body mass: evidence of cohort distortions in the United States.American journal of public health · 2012Article
- A point-by-point response to recent arguments against the use of statins in primary prevention: this statement is endorsed by the American Society for Preventive Cardiology.Clinical cardiology · 2012Review
- Lipid control in patients with diabetes mellitus.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20167360What 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.