ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Association between coronary heart disease and cardiometabolic index: a study from NHANES 1999-2018.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. 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.
- Prognostic value of the cardiometabolic index for cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.Frontiers in nutrition · 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
Abstract
backgroundThe cardiometabolic index (CMI), a sex-specific marker combining lipid profiles with anthropometric measures, may reflect visceral adiposity dysfunction. Its association with coronary heart disease (CHD) risk remains inadequately characterized in large populations.
methodsThis cross-sectional study included 20,888 adults from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999–2018. The association between CMI and CHD was assessed using weighted multivariable logistic regression. Restricted cubic splines (RCS) and threshold effect analyses explored non-linearity. A predictive model was developed and evaluated via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.
resultsAfter full adjustment, a significant positive association was observed between CMI and CHD risk (OR = 1.17, 95%CI:1.11–1.23). Participants in the highest CMI quartile had a 58% greater risk than those in the lowest (OR = 1.58, 95%CI:1.06–2.37). RCS analysis revealed a non-linear relationship (P-nonlinearity < 0.001), with a threshold identified at CMI = 1.175. Below this point, each unit increase in CMI was associated with a 133% elevation in CHD risk (OR = 2.33, 95%CI:1.83–2.97). The final predictive model, incorporating CMI and key covariates, demonstrated robust discrimination (AUC = 0.861, 95%CI:0.851–0.872).
conclusionsCMI is independently and non-linearly associated with CHD prevalence, with a heightened effect below a threshold of 1.175. This index shows promise as a practical tool for improving CHD risk stratification.
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.