Evidence mapPaperPMID 39070021Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive cardiology2024

HDL-C criterion of the metabolic syndrome and future diabetes and atherosclerosis in midlife women: The SWAN Study.

Ziyuan Wang, Emma Barinas-Mitchell, Maria M Brooks, Sybil L Crawford, Aleda M Leis, Carol A Derby, Rebecca C Thurston, Monique M Hedderson, Imke Janssen, Elizabeth A Jackson and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Ziyuan WangDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh PA, USA.
Emma Barinas-MitchellDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh PA, USA.
Maria M BrooksDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh PA, USA.
Sybil L CrawfordTan Chingfen Graduate School of Nursing, University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Aleda M LeisDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Carol A DerbyDepartments of Neurology, and of Epidemiology and Population Health, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA.
Rebecca C ThurstonDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh PA, USA.
Monique M HeddersonDivision of Research, Kaiser Permanente of Northern California, Oakland, CA, USA.
Imke JanssenDepartment of Family and Preventive Medicine, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Elizabeth A JacksonDivision of Cardiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Daniel S McConnellDepartment of Epidemiology, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Samar R El KhoudaryDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health, Pittsburgh PA, USA.

Funding

CTSA K12 Program at the University of MichiganK12TR004374 · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · 2025 to 2025
$1.6M
NCATS NIH HHS K12 TR004374
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) is one of 5 components [high blood pressure, glucose, triglycerides, waist circumference, low HDL-C], 3 of which, needed to diagnose metabolic syndrome (MetS). Evolving research shows that higher HDL-C is not necessarily cardioprotective in midlife women, supporting a need to re-evaluate HDL-C's contribution to risks related to MetS. We tested whether risk of future diabetes and higher carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) differ by HDL-C status in midlife women diagnosed with MetS based on the other 4 components. Methods Midlife women were classified into 3 groups: 1) no MetS, 2) MetS with HDL-C ≥ 50 mg/dL (MetS hiHDL), and 3) MetS with HDL-C < 50 mg/dL (MetS loHDL). cIMT was measured 13.8 ± 0.6 years post baseline. Incident diabetes was assessed yearly. Results: Among 2773 women (1350 (48 %) of them had cIMT), 2383 (86 %) had no MetS, 117 (4 %) had MetS hiHDL, 273 (10 %) had MetS loHDL. Compared with no MetS, both MetS- hiHDL and loHDL groups had higher cIMT and diabetes risk. Risk of having high cIMT did not differ between MetS loHDL vs. hiHDL groups. Adjusting for levels of MetS criteria other than HDL-C at baseline explained the associations of each of the two MetS groups with cIMT. Conversely, after adjustment, associations of MetS hiHDL and MetS loHDL with incident diabetes persisted. Conclusions: In midlife women, HDL-C status matters for predicting risk of incident diabetes but not higher cIMT beyond other MetS components.

Indexed as

DiabetesHDL-CMetabolic syndromeSubclinical atherosclerosis

Identifiers

PMID39070021
PMCPMC11279330

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.