ArticleThe journal of nutrition, health & aging2024
Joint effects of physical frailty and traditional cardiovascular risk factor control on cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes.
Article in The journal of nutrition, health & aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association of iodized salt intake with the risk of physical frailty in patients with type 2 diabetes.The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 2025Article
- The Use of SGLT-2 Inhibitors and GLP-1RA in Frail Older People with Diabetes: A Personalised Approach Is Required.Metabolites · 2025Review
- Letter to the editor on: "Joint effects of physical frailty and traditional cardiovascular risk factor control on cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes".The journal of nutrition, health & aging · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesPhysical frailty has been found to increase the risk of multiple adverse outcomes including cardiovascular disease (CVD) in diabetic patients, but whether this could be modified by traditional risk factor control remains unknown. We aimed to explore the joint and interaction effects of frailty and traditional risk factor control on the risk of CVD.
designA population-based cohort study. SETTING AND
participantsWe included 15,753 participants with type 2 diabetes at baseline from UK Biobank. MEASUREMENTS: Physical frailty was assessed by Fried criteria's frailty phenotype. The degree of risk factor control was determined by the numbers of the following factors controlled within the target range, including glycated hemoglobin, blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, smoking, and kidney condition. Incident CVD included coronary heart disease, stroke, or heart failure. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the individual and joint effects of frailty and risk factor control on the risk of CVD.
resultsAfter a median follow-up of 13.5 years, 1129 incident CVD events were observed. Compared with non-frailty, both prefrailty and frailty were significantly associated with increased risk of CVD (HR 1.22, 95% CI [1.13, 1.31] for pre-frailty and 1.70 [1.53, 1.90] for frailty). For the joint effects, participants with frailty and a low degree of risk factor control (control of 0-1 risk factors) had the highest risk of CVD (2.92 [2.04, 4.17]) compared to those with non-frailty and optimal risk factor control (control of 4-5 risk factors). Moreover, a significant additive interaction between frailty and risk factor control was observed, with around 3.8% of CVD risk attributed to the interactive effects.
conclusionsBoth prefrailty and frailty were associated with a higher risk of CVD in participants with type 2 diabetes. Moreover, physical frailty could interact with the degree of risk factor control in an additive manner to increase the CVD risk.
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.