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

Erythrocyte stearidonic acid and other n-3 fatty acids and CHD in the Physicians' Health Study.



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

Primary Publication Information
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
TitleData
Title Erythrocyte stearidonic acid and other n-3 fatty acids and CHD in the Physicians' Health Study.
Author Matsumoto C., Matthan NR., Wilk JB., Lichtenstein AH., Michael Gaziano J., Djoussé L.
Country Division of Aging, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02120, USA. cmatsumoto2@partners.org
Year 2013
Numbers Pubmed ID: 23098619

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: Nested Case Control
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
What is the name of this study? (e.g. DART, Physician's Health Study) Physician's Health Study (Also see Morris 7598116 entry)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Country in which study conducted (where subjects live) US
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Funding source No industry relationship reported (funding or affiliations reported)
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Eligibility Criteria: An ancillary study of PHS: randomly selected 1000 incident CHD cases that provided blood samples between 1995 and 2001. Density sampling technique to select 1 control who was alive and free of confirmed CHD at the time of the index case diagnosis and matched on age at blood collection (within 1 year), year of birth (within 2 years), and time of blood collection (within 3 months).
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study Population Primary Prevention, Healthy
  • 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? Baseline biomarker level vs. outcomes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Study start date(s) 1995-2001
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Male, percent 100
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Race nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Dropouts, withdrawals, etc. not applicable
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Baseline characteristics, continuous 68.7
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
8.7
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
25.8
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
3.4
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
nd
  • 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
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Outcome assessment (ALL STUDIES): Were OUTCOME ASSESSORS adequately BLINDED? Low risk
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) due to amount, nature or handling of incomplete outcome data (ALL STUDIES) Low risk
  • 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)? Not Applicable biomarkers
  • 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)? Yes
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Additional Bias: Bias due to problems not covered elsewhere in the table. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |
Do any specific outcomes have a high risk of bias (different than others)? If so, describe in Notes. No
  • Comments Comments (
    0
    ) |

Quality Rating
No quality rating data was found.