ArticleClinical interventions in aging2025
Association of Vascular Aging Phenotypes with Adverse Clinical Outcomes in the Chinese Population: A Multicentre Study.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of Vascular Aging Models on the Basis of Different Vascular Indicators for Cardiovascular Events Prediction: A Chinese Community-Based Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Article
- Vascular Age: A narrative review of assessment methods, clinical applications, and future directions.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2026Review
- Global Burden, Attributable Risk Factors, and Future Projections of Lower Extremity Peripheral Arterial Disease Among Postmenopausal Women.International journal of women's health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the clinical implications of vascular aging (VAg) phenotypes based on the difference between chronological age (CA) and vascular age (VA). Patients and Methods: We defined VA as the predicted age in a multivariable linear regression model including structural and functional parameters of arteries and conventional risk factors, in a multicentric, cross-sectional cohort (n=15580). According to the 10 Results: In the prospective cohort (11.07 years, 927 events), when compared to the Normal VAg phenotype, EVA had an increased risk (HR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.80-3.27) and SUPERNOVA had a decrease risk (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.64-0.90) of adverse clinical outcomes, in particular stroke events. EVA also showed a higher risk of myocardial infarction (HR: 3.21, 95% CI: 1.56-6.62) and all-cause death (HR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.12-2.85). The associations were independent of the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score. Further, the C-statistics increased 0.010 ( Conclusion: This is the first study to evaluate the clinical implications of VAg phenotypes using multicentric data and undergone external validation in China. Our results emphasized that the classification of VAg phenotypes may be a potential tool to identify individuals who were susceptible to or resilient to VAg.
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.