Cited by 229Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsDiabetes Treatment and ManagementBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 128 of the 136 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Persons with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Current Knowledge and Rationale for the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Trial

Open access

Abstract

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus die of cardiovascular disease (CVD) at rates 2-4 times higher than patients without diabetes but with similar demographic characteristics. The prevalence of diabetes is increasing in the United States and, thus, the prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes poses an urgent public health challenge. The objective of this report is to review the current knowledge base for the prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes, with particular emphasis on the control of glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure. Epidemiologic analyses suggest that each 1% increase in glycosylated hemoglobin increases the risk for CVD by approximately 18%; however, evidence from the randomized trials that have examined whether glucose lowering reduces this risk is conflicting. Randomized trials have shown that lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduces CVD event rates by 17%-43% in patients with diabetes. Limited data support a role for lowering triglycerides and increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in the prevention of CVD. Evidence from clinical trials shows that reducing systolic blood pressure to <140 mm Hg results in 30%-60% reductions in CVD events; however, epidemiologic evidence suggests that lowering to optimal systolic blood pressure levels (<120 mm Hg) may be additionally beneficial. Important questions regarding prevention of CVD in patients with diabetes remain unresolved, including the benefits of near-normal glycemic control, comprehensive therapy for diabetes-related dyslipidemia, and optimal blood pressure control. The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial will test hypotheses to address these unanswered questions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.03.002

Cites

128 of 128 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 136 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Gerstein, 1999, Advantages and perceived disadvantages of insulin therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes, Can J Diabetes Care, 23, S93
  2. 2003, Aspirin therapy in diabetes, Diabetes Care, 26, S87

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–229 of 229

Metadata

Authors
Goff, D. C., Gerstein, H. C., Ginsberg, H. N., Cushman, W. C., Margolis, K. L., Byington, R. P., Buse, J. B., Genuth, S., Probstfield, J. L., & Simons-Morton, D. G.
Affiliations
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Population Health Research Institute (CA)
  • Columbia University (US)
  • Memphis VA Medical Center (US)
  • Hennepin County Medical Center (US)
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • University of Washington Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Goff, David C.
Venue
The American Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-06
Volume
99
Issue
12
Pages
S4-S20
ISSN
0002-9149 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2086199335
Cited by
229
References
136
Citations by year
2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
14.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The American Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01hc95183-23-0-0, n01hc95180-24-0-1, n01hc95184-24-0-1, n01hc95181-23-0-1, n01hc95182-23-0-1, n01hc95178-28-0-1, n01hc95179-25-0-0)
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
  • National Institute on Aging
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01- HC-95181, N01-HC- 95180, N01-HC-95178, Y1-HC-9035, N01-HC-95184, N01HC95179, IAA #Y1-HC-9035, Y1-HC-1010, N01‐HC‐95183, N01-HC-95182)
  • National Eye Institute
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease prevention, cardiovascular risk, glycemic control, HbA1c, LDL cholesterol lowering, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, blood pressure control, dyslipidemia, ACCORD trial, cardiovascular events
MeSH terms
Antihypertensive Agents, Hypolipidemic Agents, Coronary Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Angiopathies, Humans, Fenofibrate, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review