Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Comparison of Three Different Methods to Evaluate Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation in the Elderly: The Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) Study

Open access
Lind, Lars, Fors, Nilla, Hall, Jan, Marttala, Kerstin, Stenborg, Anna·2005·Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology

Abstract

Background— Three different techniques to evaluate endothelium-dependent vasodilation in the peripheral circulation have been described but not simultaneously tested in a large-scale population-based setting. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of these techniques in the Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) study. Methods and Results— In the population-based PIVUS study (1016 subjects aged 70 years), the invasive forearm technique with acetylcholine given in the brachial artery (EDV), the brachial artery ultrasound technique with measurement of flow-mediated dilatation (FMD), and the pulse wave analysis method with β-2-agonist (terbutaline) provocation were successfully used in 87%, 97%, and 86% of the sample, respectively. The results of EDV and pulse wave analysis were interrelated ( r =0.12, P =0.0013), but no relationships were found with FMD measurements. All 3 techniques were correlated to the Framingham risk score ( r =0.10 to 0.12, P =0.0007 to 0.001). In multiple regression analysis, however, only EDV and FMD were independently associated with the Framingham score. Conclusions— All 3 evaluated techniques were feasible to perform in a general elderly population. Both the invasive forearm technique and FMD were independently associated with increased coronary risk, suggesting that information on conduit artery and resistance artery endothelial function carry different, but important, information in the elderly. If the invasive technique cannot be used, the pulse wave based technique is an alternative.

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 · 10.1161/01.atv.0000184769.22061.da

Cites

3 of 3 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

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 3 references

Cited by

See all 363

Metadata

Authors
Lind, L., Fors, N., Hall, J., Marttala, K., & Stenborg, A.
Venue
Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology
Published
2005-11
Volume
25
Issue
11
Pages
2368-2375
ISSN
  • 1079-5642 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4636
OpenAlex
W2141976211
Cited by
363
References
3
FWCI
11.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparison of Three Different Methods to Evaluate Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation in the Elderly: The Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.atv.0000184769.22061.da
The paper
Lind, L., Fors, N., Hall, J., Marttala, K., & Stenborg, A. (2005). A Comparison of Three Different Methods to Evaluate Endothelium-Dependent Vasodilation in the Elderly: The Prospective Investigation of the Vasculature in Uppsala Seniors (PIVUS) Study. Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.atv.0000184769.22061.da

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.