Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 662

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

Carotid Intima-Media Thickening Indicates a Higher Vascular Risk Across a Wide Age Range: Prospective Data From the Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study (CAPS)

Lorenz, Matthias W., von Kegler, Stefan, Steinmetz, Helmuth, Markus, Hugh S., Sitzer, Matthias·2006·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) is an independent predictor of vascular events in age groups >45 years. However, there is little information about the predictive value of IMT in younger individuals. Methods— In the Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study (CAPS; n=5056; age range 19 to 90 years; mean age 50.1 years), common carotid artery (CCA) IMT, bifurcation IMT, internal carotid artery IMT and vascular risk factors were evaluated at baseline. The incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death was determined prospectively. Data for younger (<50 years; n=2436) and older subjects (≥50 years; n=2620) were analyzed separately using Cox proportional hazard regression models. Results— During a mean follow-up period of 4.2 years, there were 228 cases of MI, 107 strokes, and 50 deaths. IMT at all carotid segments was highly predictive of all end points (eg, hazard rate ratios [HRRs] per 1 SD CCA-IMT increase were 1.43 [95% CI: 1.35 to 1.51] for MI, 1.47 [1.35 to 1.60] for stroke, and 1.45 [1.38 to 1.52] for MI, stroke or death; all P <0.0001). Even after adjustment for age, sex, and vascular risk factors, the predictive value of CCA-IMT and bifurcation IMT remained significant for MI and the combined end point. For the latter, the HRRs were considerably higher in the younger than in the older age group (eg, HRR per 0.1 mm CCA-IMT was 1.34 [1.16 to 1.55] vis-à-vis 1.10 [1.05 to 1.15]; P =0.011 for age-IMT interaction). Conclusions— Carotid IMT independently predicts future vascular events. Its predictive value is at least as high in younger subjects as in older subjects.

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.str.0000196964.24024.ea

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 662

Metadata

Authors
Lorenz, M. W., von Kegler, S., Steinmetz, H., Markus, H. S., & Sitzer, M.
Venue
Stroke
Published
2006-01
Volume
37
Issue
1
Pages
87-92
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W2085207465
Cited by
662
References
3
FWCI
14.85
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

How to cite

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

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Carotid Intima-Media Thickening Indicates a Higher Vascular Risk Across a Wide Age Range: Prospective Data From the Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study (CAPS). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.str.0000196964.24024.ea
The paper
Lorenz, M. W., von Kegler, S., Steinmetz, H., Markus, H. S., & Sitzer, M. (2006). Carotid Intima-Media Thickening Indicates a Higher Vascular Risk Across a Wide Age Range: Prospective Data From the Carotid Atherosclerosis Progression Study (CAPS). Stroke. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.str.0000196964.24024.ea

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.