This is the old version of SRDR. The next, SRDRplus is available! Registration of your SRDRPlus account is free and approval is automatic. Click Here to register an SRDRPlus account.

Advanced Search

Study Preview



Study Title and Description

Plasma fatty acid composition and incident heart failure in middle-aged adults: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study.



Key Questions Addressed
2 Observational studies (longitudinal; quantile or continuous analysis)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Plasma fatty acid composition and incident heart failure in middle-aged adults: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study.
Author Yamagishi K., Nettleton JA., Folsom AR.
Country Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55454-1015, USA.
Year 2008
Numbers Pubmed ID: 19061714
12962 (internal)

Secondary Publication Information
UI Title Author Country Year
Plasma fatty acid composition and incident ischemic stroke in middle-aged adults: the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study. Yamagishi K., Folsom AR., Steffen LM. Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minn., USA. 2013
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Fish, fish-derived n-3 fatty acids, and risk of incident atrial fibrillation in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Gronroos NN., Chamberlain AM., Folsom AR., Soliman EZ., Agarwal SK., Nettleton JA., Alonso A. Division of Epidemiology and Community Health, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 2012
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |



Extraction Form: Observational Studies
Design Details
Question... Follow Up Answer Follow-up Answer
Study Design Observational: Prospective, longitudinal study of intake (eg, FFQ, biomarker)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the name of this study? (e.g. DART, Physician's Health Study) Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) US
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: Aged 45-64 at baseline (1987-89), initially free of coronary heart disease, stroke and HF, and who had cholesterol ester and phospholipid plasma fatty acids measured
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population Primary Prevention, Healthy
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
At baseline, did all subjects have (per eligibility criteria)...? ... Define: Other ... The population is a mixture of people
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Conflict of interest No conflict of interest (explicitly stated)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Does the study report a subgroup or predictor (regression) analysis for an outcome of interest? ... Which subgroups/predictors? Yes ... Sex
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What type(s) of analysis is/are reported? Baseline intake (eg, from FFQ) vs. outcomes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 1987
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 46.6%
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race 100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 54.2 (men); 53.3 (women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
5.6(men); 5.5(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
120.5(men); 116.9(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
14.8(men); 17.0(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
75.5(men); 72.1 (women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
9.2(men); 9.1(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
212(men); 216(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
39(men); 42(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
44(men); 60(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
12(men); 17(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
139(men);116(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mg/dL
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
94(men); 73(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
27.7(men); 26.2(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3.7(men); 5(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline Diseases/Conditions 0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
n3 Source Diet (Total)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |




Results & Comparisons

No Results found.

Quality Dimensions
Dimension Value Notes Comments
Selection bias (NOT NESTED CASE CONTROL): Is there clear demonstration that the outcome of interest was not present at the start of the study (baseline)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Comparability/Adjustment (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES): Were the analyses adjusted for confounders (or other factors)? Yes Different for three studies; Neither diet nor CVD risk factors for the primary study.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome assessment (ALL STUDIES): Were OUTCOME ASSESSORS adequately BLINDED? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data (ALL STUDIES) No Data
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, FFQ Baseline intake: Was the dietary assessment instrument (eg, FFQ) described to have measured n-3 FA (ALL STUDIES WITH FFQ)? Yes Yes (biomarker)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Nutrition, Baseline data: Were the ranges or distributions of the nutrient exposures adequately reported (ie, quantile means/medians SD and/or ranges) (ALL OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES)? No some thresholds and median are not provided
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Do any specific outcomes have a high risk of bias (different than others)? If so, describe in Notes.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.