CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 287Adrenal and Paraganglionic TumorsHormonal Regulation and HypertensionAdrenal Hormones and Disorders

On the prevalence of adrenocortical adenomas in an autopsy material in relation to hypertension and diabetes

Hedeland, Hans, Östberg, Görel, Hökfelt, Bernt·1968·Acta Medica Scandinavica
DOI 10.1111/j.0954-6820.1968.tb02445.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract A prospective study was performed on an autopsy material consisting of 739 consecutive cases over 20 years of age (391 females, 348 males) during a period of six months. The material included about 70% of the deaths in the city of Malmö (approximately 250,000 inhabitants). The adrenals were specially observed at autopsy for adenomas and hospital records were searched for hypertension and diabetes mellitus. In the total material the frequency of adrenocortical adenomas was 8.7%, which was considerably higher than previously reported figures. In patients with essential hypertension the adenoma frequency was 12.4% as against 7.9% in normotensives. This difference was not statistically significant. The adenoma frequency in men with secondary hypertension was remarkably high but the significance is not clear. In patients with hypertension the frequency of diabetes was 17.6% as compared to 9.0% in normotensives. This difference was statistically probably significant. In patients with diabetes the frequency of adrenocortical adenomas was 16.5%, in non‐diabetics 7.7%. The difference was probably significant.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.0954-6820.1968.tb02445.x

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • In autopsy series with greater than 1000 patients, the reported prevalence of AI ranges from 1.05% to 8.7%.

    “In the autopsy series with large patient numbers (series with greater than 1000 patients) (9-16), the reported prevalence of AI ranges from 1.05% (9) to 8.7% (10) (Table 1 (9-31)).”

    From Adrenal incidentaloma (2020) · cites this paper as [10]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hedeland, H., Östberg, G., & Hökfelt, B.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Venue
Acta Medica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1968-01-12
Volume
184
Issue
1-6
Pages
211-214
ISSN
0001-6101 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1111/j.0954-6820.1968.tb02445.x
OpenAlex
W2067873837
Cited by
287
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 15078 d)
Locations
  • Acta Medica Scandinavica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Adrenal and Paraganglionic Tumors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hormonal Regulation and Hypertension
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Adrenal Hormones and Disorders
Keywords
adrenal adenoma, adrenal incidentaloma, prevalence, essential hypertension, secondary hypertension, diabetes mellitus, autopsy findings, adrenal gland
MeSH terms
Adenoma, Adrenal Gland Neoplasms, Adult, Aged, Diabetes Mellitus, Female, Humans, Hyperaldosteronism, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies

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