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

The prognostic value of adipose tissue fatty acids for incident cardiovascular disease: results from 3944 subjects in the Scottish Heart Health Extended Cohort Study.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title The prognostic value of adipose tissue fatty acids for incident cardiovascular disease: results from 3944 subjects in the Scottish Heart Health Extended Cohort Study.
Author Woodward M., Tunstall-Pedoe H., Batty GD., Tavendale R., Hu FB., Czernichow S.
Country Cardiovascular Epidemiology, Institute of Cardiovascular Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK. mwoodward@george.org.au
Year 2011
Numbers Pubmed ID: 21345851

Secondary Publication Information
There are currently no secondary publications defined for this study.


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) Scottish Heart Health Extended Cohort Study
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) UK
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source Industry funded
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: 3944 participants, predominantly aged 40–59 years, in Scotland. Anyone with evidence of CVD at baseline was excluded from all the analyses reported here.
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
At baseline, did all subjects have (per eligibility criteria)...? ... Define: Other ... None of them has history of CVD.
  • 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? No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What type(s) of analysis is/are reported? Quantiles of baseline measures
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 1984
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 53
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. 489
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
4433
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
11
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
missing values for any of the covariates chosen for multivariable analysis
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 49.0(men) 48.9(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
6.9(men) 6.6(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
133.2(men) 130.0(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
skip
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
18.5(men) 20.0(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
6.29(men) 6.49(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mmol/L
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
1.13(men) 1.31(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
1.38(men) 1.68(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
mmol/L
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
0.37(men) 0.42(women)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline Diseases/Conditions 21 (men) 19(women)
  • 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 Including CVD risk factors, but not diet
  • 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
  • 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 Measured n-3 FA from BOTH diet and supplements
  • 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 no quantile thresholds or median 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.