ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Improving Cardiovascular Risk in Postmenopausal Women with an (-)-Epicatechin-Based Nutraceutical: A Randomly Assigned, Double-Blind vs. Placebo, Proof-of-Concept Trial.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07149506 (Efficacy of Oral or Topical Catechins vs. Placebo as an Adjuvant for the Prevention and Management of Radiation Dermatitis in Oncology Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 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.
Efficacy of Oral or Topical Catechins vs. Placebo as an Adjuvant for the Prevention and Management of Radiation Dermatitis in Oncology Patients: a Randomized Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluation of Alkaline-Labile Sulfane Sulfur in Biological Samples: The Influence of Hyperhomocysteinemia and Oxidative Stress.Biomolecules · 2026Article
- Effects of Cacao Flavonoids in Long COVID-19 Patients with Chronic Fatigue: FLALOC, a Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Multifaced Nature of Yohimbine-A Promising Therapeutic Potential or a Risk?International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAge-adjusted rates of cardiovascular disease (CVD) are higher in men than in women. CVD risk-factor outcomes are underrecognized, underestimated, and undertreated in women because the clinical expressions in women differ from those of men. There are no universally accepted recommendations on what to do in women when the values of fasting glucose, blood pressure, and lipids are only slightly altered or at borderline values. We reported the positive effects on CVD risk markers using cacao by-products, showing that alternative approaches can be used to prevent cardiovascular disease in women. The objective was to evaluate the changes in lipoprotein subfractions induced by three months of treatment with an epicatechin-enriched cacao supplement.
methodsA double-blind, placebo-controlled proof-of-concept study was developed to evaluate the effects of 3 months of treatment with an (-)-epicatechin-enriched cacao supplement on lipoprotein subfractions.
resultsThe usual screening workshop for postmenopausal women could be insufficient and misleading. Assessing the effect of a (-)-epicatechin-enriched cacao supplement employing a lipoprotein subfractionation profile analysis suggests a decrease in cardiovascular risk.
conclusionsA simple, low-cost, safe (-)-epicatechin-enriched cacao supplement product can improve the cardiovascular risk in postmenopausal women.
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.