ArticleMedicine2026
Cross-sectional association between relative fat mass and abdominal aortic calcification among US adults: The NHANES 2013 to 2014.
Article in Medicine, 2026. 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) serves as a reliable predictor of future cardiovascular incidents. This study investigated the association between relative fat mass (RFM) and AAC in US adults. A total of 3079 adults aged ≥40 years from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2013 to 2014 were included in the cross-sectional study. AAC was evaluated using a semi-quantitative scoring system known as AAC-24, with an AAC score >6 considered severe AAC (SAAC). Logistic regression analyses and restricted cubic splines were applied. Subgroup analyses were also conducted. After adjusting for confounding factors, a clear link was established between RFM and AAC score (β = -0.048, 95% CI: -0.078 to -0.017, P < .01) and between RFM and SAAC (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.00, P < .05). Further restricted cubic spline analysis indicated a negative correlation between RFM and both AAC score and SAAC. In this cross-sectional study, an inverse association was observed between RFM and both AAC score and severe AAC, with a threshold of approximately 48 to 50. Below this threshold, lower RFM was associated with a sharply higher probability of calcification; above it, higher RFM corresponded to a gradually lower probability. Due to the cross-sectional design, causality cannot be inferred. Further prospective cohort studies are needed to validate these findings.
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.