ArticlePreventive medicine reports2025
Association between Atherogenic index of plasma and gallstones in the United States adults: A cross-sectional analysis of NHANES 2017-2020.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although substantial evidence suggests an association between dyslipidemia as an isolated factor and gallstones, research on the Atherogenic Index of Plasma (AIP) and gallstones remains limited. Methods: A total of 3557 eligible adults from the United States were selected for cross-sectional analysis using the 2017-2020 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey database. Logistic regression was employed to evaluate the association between AIP gallstones. Restricted cubic spline (RCS) analysis and threshold effect analysis were conducted to explore potential non-linear relationship. Results: The study found a positive association between higher AIP levels and higher odds of gallstones. In the fully adjusted logistic regression model, each 1-unit increase in AIP was associated with 59 % higher odds of gallstones (OR = 1.59, 95 % CI: 1.06, 2.38). Compared to the lowest quartile of AIP, the highest quartile showed 82 % higher odds of gallstones (OR = 1.82, 95 % CI: 1.23, 2.69). RCS analysis revealed a non-linear relationship between AIP and gallstones, with threshold effect analysis identifying a turning point at -0.13, where AIP had a positive correlation with gallstones before this threshold. Conclusion: Higher AIP is positively correlated with higher odds of gallstones, showing a non-linear relationship. As AIP increases, the odds of gallstones also rise, but this relationship is no longer observed beyond a certain threshold. It is recommended to maintain appropriate AIP levels to reduce the incidence of gallstones.
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.