ArticleReviews in cardiovascular medicine2024
Exploring the Impact of Niacin Intake on Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Comprehensive Analysis Using NHANES Data (2003-2018).
Article in Reviews in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Small dense LDL: An underestimated driver of atherosclerosis (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The relationship between cardiovascular outcomes and niacin consumption levels remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the correlation between niacin intake and the incidence of cardiovascular disease, as well as the mortality rates associated with cardiovascular disease and other causes. Methods: From 2003 to 2018, we continually investigated updated information from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Based on the quartiles of niacin intake levels, four distinct categories of participants were established: Q1 (<14.646 mg), Q2 (14.646-21.302 mg), Q3 (21.302-30.401 mg), and Q4 (>30.401 mg). Baseline variable differences were assessed employing the Chi-Square and Student's Results: The cohort analysis included 80,312 participants for the assessment of niacin intake. Comparing the Q1 dataset to the Q4 dataset in the overall population, weighted Cox regression analysis showed a negative association with all-cause mortality (95% CI: 0.71-0.96, HR: 0.82) and mortality owing to cardiovascular disease (95% CI: 0.67-0.96, odds ratio (OR): 0.80). Sex-based subgroup analysis revealed a detrimental correlation between niacin use and overall mortality in females (Q4 cohort: 95% CI: 0.62-0.97, HR: 0.78) but not in males. Additionally, the Q3 (95% CI: 0.59-0.94, HR: 0.75) and Q4 (95% CI: 0.51-0.97, HR: 0.7) groups exhibited a negative association with female cardiovascular disease mortality compared to the Q1 group. Niacin intake was not significantly correlated with prevalence, all-cause mortality, or death from cardiovascular disease in males. Conclusions: Higher niacin consumption was correlated with a decreased risk of cardiovascular disease and death from all causes across the entire study population. Nevertheless, only females, and not males, exhibited a beneficial effect on mortality.
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.