ArticleFrontiers in medicine2023
General Public's knowledge, awareness, and perception of Cardiometabolic diseases: data from a Singapore study population.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2023. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex differences in survival following acute coronary syndrome with and without standard modifiable risk factors.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2025Pooled it
- Myocardial Infarction Without Standard Modifiable Risk Factors From 2025-2040: Forecast Analysis of Multinational, Population-Based Study.JACC. Asia · 2026Article
- Global Trends and Forecast of Cardiovascular Diseases, Cancer, and Shared Risk Factors: Insights From the GBD 2021.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Non-invasive scoring systems of liver fibrosis predict prognosis in the cohort with myocardial infarction.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The burden of cardiovascular disease in Asia from 2025 to 2050: a forecast analysis for East Asia, South Asia, South-East Asia, Central Asia, and high-income Asia Pacific regions.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Health literacy and illness perception play crucial roles in tackling the cardiometabolic disease epidemic. We aim to compare the attitudes, knowledge, self-perceived risks and actions taken, between individuals with and without metabolic risk factors (MFs). Methods: From 5 June to 5 October 2022, participants of the general public were invited to complete a self-administered questionnaire. MF status was defined as the presence of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus and/or current/previous smoking. Participants were assessed based on four categories (knowledge-based, attitude-based, perceived risk, and action-based) of questions pertaining to four cardiometabolic diseases - diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Results: A total of 345 participants were enrolled, of whom 34.5% had at least one MF. Compared to those without MFs, participants with MFs had lower knowledge scores, but higher perceived risk scores across all cardiometabolic diseases. The largest knowledge gap pertained to hypertension-related questions. After adjustment, linear regression demonstrated that the presence of MFs (β:2.752, 95%CI: 0.772-4.733, Conclusion: This study identified a vulnerable subpopulation living with MFs, with high perceived risks, and discordant levels of knowledge and preventive actions taken. Nationwide efforts should be channeled into addressing the knowledge-to-action gap.
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.