ArticleBrazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas2026
Subclinical atherosclerosis in rheumatoid arthritis: a case cohort analysis from ELSA-Brasil.
Article in Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas, 2026. 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.
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
This study evaluated prevalence, incidence, and progression of carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT) and carotid artery plaques (CAP) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients compared with controls during 8 years of follow-up. A case-cohort analysis of data from the ELSA-Brasil cohort was conducted, with cIMT and CAP measured by carotid ultrasound at baseline and follow-up. Linear regression was used to estimate cIMT mean and progression (ΔcIMT). Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for elevated cIMT (≥75th percentile), CAP prevalence, incidence, and progression. Models were adjusted for sociodemographic and cardiovascular risk factors, excluding participants with prior cardiovascular disease. A total of 1,289 participants (188 RA, 1,101 controls) were included in the cIMT analysis and 585 (93 RA, 492 controls) in the CAP analysis. RA was not associated with baseline cIMT (β=0.00; 95%CI: -0.02-0.02; P=0.930), high cIMT (OR=1.04; 95%CI: 0.69-1.57; P=0.864), or ΔcIMT (β=0.00; 95%CI: -0.01-0.02; P=0.688). Incidence of elevated cIMT showed a non-significant trend toward higher risk in RA (OR=2.01; 95%CI: 0.88-4.59; P=0.098). No associations were found for CAP prevalence at baseline (OR=1.64; 95%CI: 0.92-2.91; P=0.090), prevalence at follow-up (OR=0.75; 95%CI: 0.41-1.36; P=0.342), incidence (OR=0.78; 95%CI: 0.37-1.63; P=0.508), or progression (β=-0.33; 95%CI: -0.72-0.07; P=0.102). This study found no independent association between RA and cIMT or CAP.
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.