Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 938

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lipoprotein(a) and Coronary Heart Disease: Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

Danesh, John, Collins, Rory, Peto, Richard·2000·Circulation

Abstract

Background —Studies of the association between the plasma concentration of lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and coronary heart disease (CHD) have reported apparently conflicting findings. We report a meta-analysis of the prospective studies with at least 1 year of follow-up published before 2000. Methods and Results —The following information was abstracted for each study: geographical location of study, size, type of cohort (population-based or selected because of previous disease), mean age, follow-up duration, blood storage temperature and duration, assay methods, degree of adjustment for potential confounders, and relationship of baseline Lp(a) measurement with subsequent CHD risk. There were 5436 deaths from CHD or nonfatal myocardial infarctions during a weighted mean follow-up of 10 years in the 27 eligible studies. Comparison of individuals in the top third of baseline plasma Lp(a) measurements with those in the bottom third in each study yielded a combined risk ratio of 1.6 (95% CI 1.4 to 1.8, 2 P <0.00001), with similar findings when the analyses were restricted to the 18 studies of general populations (combined risk ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.4 to 1.9; 2 P <0.00001). Despite differences among studies in blood storage techniques and assay methods, there was no significant heterogeneity among the results from the 18 population-based studies or among those from the 9 studies of patients with previous disease. Lp(a) was only weakly correlated with classical vascular risk factors, and adjustment for those that had been recorded made little difference to the reported risk ratios. Conclusions —These prospective studies demonstrate a clear association between Lp(a) and CHD, but further studies are needed to determine the extent to which this is causal.

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.cir.102.10.1082

Cites

1 of 1 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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Danesh, J., Collins, R., & Peto, R.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2000-09-05
Volume
102
Issue
10
Pages
1082-1085
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2130483103
Cited by
938
References
1
FWCI
44.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

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.