Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
Several discussions critically analyze the findings of the DANCAVAS trial, such as the assertion that comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not lead to a reduction in mortality rates among older men. Phrases like 'no benefits' and 'inutil' (useless) reflect a disappointed or critical tone towards the implications of the study. This choice of language, coupled with the context of the findings, suggests a collective skepticism about the effectiveness of population-based screening, which ultimately influences the overall sentiment across the discussions.
Many posts express skepticism about the validity of the trial's outcomes, indicating a divide in perspectives.
While some users engage with the findings, the overall enthusiasm appears moderate, reflecting a mix of interest and disinterest.
Users discuss the methodology and implications, but the level of depth tends to vary, with some posts being more analytical than others.
There's a perception that the study will not significantly change current practices in cardiovascular screening, leading to a sense of reduced overall impact.
Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82 Does DANCAVAS shift the needle? https://t.co/L8O7clhZhe https://t.co/7NjRBUDbFE
A really impressive study with interesting outcomes. I hope I am retired before someone manages to show that CVD screening is slightly effective. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/Mw1SJltUEc
RCTs of diagnostic tests need extremely large sample sizes to be powered for strong endpoints. Cardiovascular screening has a much bigger impact on all cause mortality than colonoscopies. https://t.co/QsWxfS5xFG https://t.co/ohYtUdVdYf
Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screening uptake. After median f/u of 5.6y, & only 63% screening uptake, ARD was 0.5% (12.6% vs 13.1%) favoring screening, https://t.co/QlzarLtzMG
Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, but let's be consistent) Reminder: DANCAVAS trial of CV screening had HR 0.95; [CI], 0.90 to 1.00; P=0.06) https://t.co/JlAohhDHAu Conclusion
I just want to say thank you to Prof Diederichsen who not only did an exemplary trial but stuck to solid scientific principles in the interpretation and explanation of this screening trial The paper -- https://t.co/JlAohhEfq2 Compare and contrast> No spin in DANCAVAS
The video discusses the FLOW trial of semaglutide, cardiovascular screening findings from the DANCAVAS trial, and noninvasive testing for chest pain. While screening in men aged 65-74 did not significantly reduce…
This week, John Mandrola MD discusses key findings from the Danish Cardiovascular Screening Trial. The trial, involving over 46,000 men aged 65-74, showed no significant reduction in mortality but indicated lower rates…
This podcast reviews the top ten cardiology stories of 2022, focusing on major trials and findings, including insights from the study on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ischemic left ventricular…
This week, investigate protocols for chest pain assessment in the ED, including recent ACC guidelines, and review the impact of colonoscopy screening on colorectal cancer risk and mortality.
In this week's podcast, John Mandrola MD discusses the PROTECTED TAVR trial and highlights the benefits of angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril-valsartan in reducing hospitalization and death in heart failure…
Ya teníamos información del grupo entre 65-74 años. https://t.co/2PuQotX4V4
RT @khurramn1: #1 Assessing comprehensive cardiovascular screening among men 1400 65 to 74 years of age in Denmark to assess in improved ou…
@_CancerRose https://t.co/SaiqrbezMv
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/nPgG4GDEBs
Pourquoi on dépiste tant ??? https://t.co/SaiqrbezMv
RT @echotalk: In this population-based, randomized trial, at a median follow-up of more than 5 years, an invitation to undergo comprehensiv…
RT @echotalk: In this population-based, randomized trial, at a median follow-up of more than 5 years, an invitation to undergo comprehensiv…
In this population-based, randomized trial, at a median follow-up of more than 5 years, an invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause. https://t.co/mDzPsCe6Ya https://t.co/Tkl8MdFXgK
RCTs of diagnostic tests need extremely large sample sizes to be powered for strong endpoints. Cardiovascular screening has a much bigger impact on all cause mortality than colonoscopies. https://t.co/QsWxfS5xFG https://t.co/ohYtUdVdYf
@alyssamvance @peefsmash What are your thoughts on this trial? N around 40k, all cause mortality, hr near significance at 0.95. https://t.co/QsWxfS5xFG
@alyssamvance https://t.co/QsWxfS5xFG
RT @gcfmd: @khurramn1 @bjcohenmd @DavidLBrownMD @DrMarthaGulati @ProfDFrancis @venkmurthy @rblument1 @WilliamZoghbi @DrDave01 @MichaelJBlah…
@khurramn1 @bjcohenmd @DavidLBrownMD @DrMarthaGulati @ProfDFrancis @venkmurthy @rblument1 @WilliamZoghbi @DrDave01 @MichaelJBlaha @drmikefarkouh @RonBlankstein Perhaps, yet the primary findings Conclusions: “After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age” | NEJM https://t.co/r4AA94E7mx
RT @drjohnm: Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, b…
Geen bewijs dat screening van oudere mannen op hart- en bloedvaten hun leven zou verlengen. Noch dat andere hartaandoeningen dan minder zouden voorkomen. Blijkt uit degelijke Deense studie bij 45,000 deelnemers. https://t.co/AeheGAux1F
RT @drjohnm: Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, b…
RT @drjohnm: Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, b…
RT @drjohnm: Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, b…
RT @drjohnm: Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, b…
Confidence intervals, Hazard ratios and absence of evidence≠evidence of absence is in the public convo (I struggle w this, but let's be consistent) Reminder: DANCAVAS trial of CV screening had HR 0.95; [CI], 0.90 to 1.00; P=0.06) https://t.co/JlAohhDHAu Conclusion
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
RT @anish_koka: Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82…
Next #twitterheartspaces cardiology panel : Cardiovascular screening with CT Calcium Scores featuring @drjohnm @AndrewFoy82 Does DANCAVAS shift the needle? https://t.co/L8O7clhZhe https://t.co/7NjRBUDbFE
@epikrisa Bara som exempel från 2022 i Danmark i NEJM: https://t.co/dK6RpBWt8z
@SABOURETCardio But is a negative trial. https://t.co/2PuQotXCKC
Interesting. Is this the Hawthorne effect? I wonder if this disproves a role for screening or shows the quality of care in the control group in this country. Maybe we should repeat in a health service with greater resource constraint! https://t.co/ijk2VfrOVN
RT @BJSAcademy:
https://t.co/iY3AlkjtHB 元のRCT。全対象者の主要アウトカム（死亡）HRは0.95 (0.90-1.00) p=0.06で、統計的に優位ではないものの、わずかな効果を示唆。65-69歳の群ではHR 0.89(0.83-0.96)で有意に死亡率低下。
@SusilPallikada1 @vass_vassiliou @tomcnguyen @gbiondizoccai Risk factors most important https://t.co/BFz3HHVyxR
RT @RevistaMFSamfyc: Resultados del ensayo de Cribado Cardiovascular Danés (DANCAVAS) a los 5 años https://t.co/V2G0aKAUSO PMID 36027560
Resultados del ensayo de Cribado Cardiovascular Danés (DANCAVAS) a los 5 años https://t.co/V2G0aKAUSO PMID 36027560
Resultados del ensayo danés de detección cardiovascular (DANCAVAS): Tras más de 5 años, la invitación a someterse a un examen cardiovascular integral no redujo significativamente la incidencia de muerte por cualquier causa entre los hombres de 65 a 74 años https://t.co/6kEqjUlZ3O
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/TTbA7InwPj
RT @DrTomFrieden: The study, published in @NEJM, was designed to maximize the likelihood that screening for heart disease would improve hea…
The study, published in @NEJM, was designed to maximize the likelihood that screening for heart disease would improve health outcomes. https://t.co/66sw6kLZlz 2/
@SAW_BW @Tim_Roehn https://t.co/4WkxfEbim9 oder https://t.co/pP58tz1Iok 2/n
NO heart screening effect on mortality … https://t.co/5f1TzjiYd6
Auch spannend. Schade, dass bei denen, die nicht zum Screening gegangen sind, obwohl sie eingeladen waren, kein Follow-up gemacht wurde. https://t.co/RmQgBmpTAH
RT @JuanGrvas: Cribado cardiovascular, inútil. Re-confirmado. After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascu…
RT @CristobMorales: https://t.co/UaPhF0dPzJ Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial. “Among older men,…
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/0m9ExQvO7c
RT @CristobMorales: https://t.co/UaPhF0dPzJ Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial. “Among older men,…
RT @SergioCinza: El cribado de lesión vascular no parece que modifique el pronóstico en pacientes de 65 a 74 años; 5 años de estudio DANCAV…
https://t.co/UaPhF0dPzJ Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial. “Among older men, an invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death at 5.6 years' follow-up” @NEJM https://t.co/n7ZQ9Ta6RW
RT @EXTREMADURASAL1: https://t.co/mIxyYKiQS2
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
RT @moreno_perez_o: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM. Resume = no benefits. https://t.co/3…
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/AZmcINMSUP
RT @SergioCinza: El cribado de lesión vascular no parece que modifique el pronóstico en pacientes de 65 a 74 años; 5 años de estudio DANCAV…
RT @LaegerUdSponsor: Flot ikke-blindet RCT ved @rsyddanmark med 46.000 mænd mellem 65 og 64 år. Efter 5 år kunne der ikke statistisk påvise…
https://t.co/nVuoGbWHNc
https://t.co/mIxyYKiQS2
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
Flot ikke-blindet RCT ved @rsyddanmark med 46.000 mænd mellem 65 og 64 år. Efter 5 år kunne der ikke statistisk påvises at invitation til screening for hjerte- karsygdomme, herunder med CT-skanning, mindsker risikoen for at dø. https://t.co/Fz71nu1Lh3
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
Screening for asymptomatic disease might not be as beneficial as we think? #DANCAVAS Still a believer in the CAC score, but unlikely should be a "screen/test for all" https://t.co/DpEpfgnm59 @NEJM @MichaelJBlaha @rblument1
RT @cristinatejerap: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
RT @SergioCinza: El cribado de lesión vascular no parece que modifique el pronóstico en pacientes de 65 a 74 años; 5 años de estudio DANCAV…
Cribado cardiovascular, inútil. Re-confirmado. After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age. https://t.co/e83Or9Bwg3
RT @rafabravo: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
https://t.co/sDmyGInVR7
Cribado cardiovascular, inútil. Re-confirmado. After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age. https://t.co/MM3V0T1hZt
@RoberRimbaud Cribado cardiovascular, inútil. Re-confirmado. After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age. https://t.co/MM3V0SKeXt
Cribado cardiovascular, inútil. Re-confirmado. After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age. https://t.co/MM3V0T1hZt
RT @cristinatejerap: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
RT @cristinatejerap: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
https://t.co/s6kqZUr27n
RT @cristinatejerap: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM. Resume = no benefits. https://t.co/3Mmhtjf4mG @sociedadSEEN @secardiologia @SENefrologia @SEMERGENap https://t.co/wFZ1eRScAp
RT @cristinatejerap: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/3QvbQ72pIV
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial, this week in @NEJM
RT @SergioCinza: El cribado de lesión vascular no parece que modifique el pronóstico en pacientes de 65 a 74 años; 5 años de estudio DANCAV…
RT @chriskc_Lee: NEJM: 5 Yr Outcomes of Danish Cardiovascular Screening Trial Population-based trial (♂️ 65-74yrs), at median F/U of >5yrs…
NEJM: 5 Yr Outcomes of Danish Cardiovascular Screening Trial Population-based trial (♂️ 65-74yrs), at median F/U of >5yrs, invitation for comprehensive CVS screening did NOT significantly ⬇️incidence of death from any cause. Screening earlier perhaps? https://t.co/R4ShR2LuQ0
El cribado de lesión vascular no parece que modifique el pronóstico en pacientes de 65 a 74 años; 5 años de estudio DANCAVAS. Debemos optimizar nuestro tiempo en consulta. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/dQNo4ogyS5
After more than 5 years, the invitation to undergo comprehensive cardiovascular screening did not significantly reduce the incidence of death from any cause among men 65 to 74 years of age. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening | NEJM https://t.co/zeeh6GUb5D
Are there mortality benefits to poulation wide screening for #heartdisease in men ages 65-74? https://t.co/g1okOGfav7
RT @drjohnm: I just want to say thank you to Prof Diederichsen who not only did an exemplary trial but stuck to solid scientific principles…
RT @drjohnm: I just want to say thank you to Prof Diederichsen who not only did an exemplary trial but stuck to solid scientific principles…
I just want to say thank you to Prof Diederichsen who not only did an exemplary trial but stuck to solid scientific principles in the interpretation and explanation of this screening trial The paper -- https://t.co/JlAohhEfq2 Compare and contrast> No spin in DANCAVAS
Often asked about heart screening given regular health checks offered by NHS England and certain employers. Yet another good RCT showing it's simply not cost-effective. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/gOHy5SHS9d
Tras las exploraciones en el grupo de intervención no hubo diferencias en los resultado CV en los 5,6 años de seguimiento. . EvidenceAlerts | Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial. https://t.co/IGZbLyFC49
RT @EricTopol: If you're a man 65 to 74 years old, should you have cardiovascular screening including a CT scan calcium score, ankle-brachi…
@LuisaBorrell @ADAlthousePhD 0.95, sample size 46 611. https://t.co/LsFaLB2fcC
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/TXsBcExYwa
RT @EricTopol: If you're a man 65 to 74 years old, should you have cardiovascular screening including a CT scan calcium score, ankle-brachi…
RT @khurramn1: #1 Assessing comprehensive cardiovascular screening among men 1400 65 to 74 years of age in Denmark to assess in improved ou…
@fnyosv https://t.co/6XuPBBbfkN
RT @JacobGudiol: Den här passar här tycker jag. Kom för någon vecka sedan. Omfattande screening för hjärt och kärlsjukdom gav ingenting htt…
Den här passar här tycker jag. Kom för någon vecka sedan. Omfattande screening för hjärt och kärlsjukdom gav ingenting https://t.co/mLRxqkAuSv Screening låter ofta väldigt sexigt och "självklart bra". Det funkar nästan aldrig https://t.co/pFfinBSO9B https://t.co/kFX8OwswqZ
RT @adamcifu: A really impressive study with interesting outcomes. I hope I am retired before someone manages to show that CVD screening is…
ESC congress 2022 recap#3 Early screening by multimodality including CAC score reduced 5-year mortality in elderly men, particularly aged 65-69 years, compared to usual care. #ESCCongres #cvPrev https://t.co/XuqvOBLDo5
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/fv1Ka871Q5
Population-Based #Cardiovascular Screening. Older Men. No #Mortality Benefit. https://t.co/33tJwDd5Pr via @NEJM - EKG - CAC scoring - CTA - ABI - even glucose/lipids DOING MORE IS *NOT* DOING BETTER! https://t.co/rdDZY0sZIE
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/Ej7ZXSjVsA
RT @FrancoisVenter3: https://t.co/vuhfWMiM3s So much screening. So little (actually, no) benefit. Goodness knows how much cost.
RT @FrancoisVenter3: https://t.co/vuhfWMiM3s So much screening. So little (actually, no) benefit. Goodness knows how much cost.
Cardiovascular Screening using calcium scoring, CT, ECG, BP, and glucose and lipid profiles may not be sensitive, hence we are developing pupilometry based approach. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/9S6ubR6sAo
RT @adamcifu: A really impressive study with interesting outcomes. I hope I am retired before someone manages to show that CVD screening is…
NEJM (IF 176), 2022-08-27 65-74歳のオランダ人男性46611人におけるCVDスクリーニングの死亡抑制効果を評価したRCT(#DANCAVAS 試験)において、介入群(スクリーニング実施率63%)のハザード比0.95(0.90-1.00)。病院で検査済のはずのCVD患者を対象にすべきではなかったのでは!? https://t.co/puAQXifq29 https://t.co/5s0FsfO2jt https://t.co/QOeYIzm05O
RT @adamcifu: A really impressive study with interesting outcomes. I hope I am retired before someone manages to show that CVD screening is…
A really impressive study with interesting outcomes. I hope I am retired before someone manages to show that CVD screening is slightly effective. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/Mw1SJltUEc
No reliable advantage detected at 5 years resulting from intensive cardiovascular screening – CTA for aneurysms, CT calcium score, peripheral vascular screening, ABIs – in older adults in Denmark. Amazing. #costsofcare #valuebasedcare #lessismore https://t.co/mn6QBTiVT9
The Danish Cardiovascular Screening Trial (DANCAVAS): a large population-based randomized clinical multicenter trial testing combo cardiovascular screening in men aged 65-74 years 5-year results published in @NEJM #ISRCTN: https://t.co/LdTeSuES7w https://t.co/Grj5ZhqA7t
@Diederichsen_SZ @drjohnm I recommend these: https://t.co/XQj3XEETEH https://t.co/vSHsHmmhN4 https://t.co/GAmBtMgO0g https://t.co/lsDfD43Zxe https://t.co/x1M9Y7Qp4p
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/LoEgW0HtGI
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/Quw1rt31u4
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/eXZ0UXnjhG
RT @rajeevgg: Screening of high-risk well treated does not add to benefit although 65-70y age-group show better outcomes. Should have been…
RT @kdjhaveri: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/GqgjcywbYf
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/GqgjcywbYf
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2208681
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/wSlrn5JmeB
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM - https://t.co/kCQ2SHHo0a https://t.co/eIsHOsulMD [via @googlenews]
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/DdOoU7lsRt
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/7QXibV4zdw
RT @DrNithi: คิดหนักล่ะครับในการจะทำการตรวจเช็คอัพจากบทความนี้ ….ประโยชน์? Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANC…
RT @DrNithi: คิดหนักล่ะครับในการจะทำการตรวจเช็คอัพจากบทความนี้ ….ประโยชน์? Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANC…
คิดหนักล่ะครับในการจะทำการตรวจเช็คอัพจากบทความนี้ ….ประโยชน์? Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM https://t.co/RW5JGFzwmd
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/9GUGvKBG4b
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (#DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM #ESCCongress https://t.co/6JocSDJ9Nv https://t.co/H6Sm8revpY
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial @NEJM #ESC https://t.co/pdOdDDPc1Z
RT @JoseJuanatey: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM CT scans did not improve prevention! Si…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
Screening of high-risk well treated does not add to benefit although 65-70y age-group show better outcomes. Should have been done with a much younger cohort 50+. Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | @NEJM https://t.co/Y4oFKqNw44
RT @JoseJuanatey: Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM CT scans did not improve prevention! Si…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial | NEJM CT scans did not improve prevention! Simple scores works in CV prevention!! @secardiologia @cardiologiaCHUS #ESCcongress https://t.co/h7SaPMyaaH
RT @kaulcsmc: Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screenin…
Is DANCAVAS truly a null trial? 1/ Study was powered for 5% RRR in mortality at 10y of f/u under assumption of 70% screening uptake. After median f/u of 5.6y, & only 63% screening uptake, ARD was 0.5% (12.6% vs 13.1%) favoring screening, https://t.co/QlzarLtzMG
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (#DANCAVAS) Trial has now been published in @NEJM https://t.co/aDmEHJSqxc #ESCCongress @ESC_Journals @mirvatalasnag @DavidLBrownMD @DLBHATTMD @hvanspall @ShelleyZieroth @DrMarthaGulati @ErinMichos @mmamas1973 https://t.co/CARVKIFciU
#ESCCongress 2022: HotLine Session 2. Prof @ADiederichsen from our Department presents the five-year outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (#DANCAVAS) Trial. The results will follow in the below thread ⬇️ @OUHhospital @SyddanskUni @kim_brixen @KOKyvik https://t.co/fLlcwG5MgE
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/zrm1X5UoJn https://t.co/RRfkJghYCx
Five-Year Outcomes of the Danish Cardiovascular Screening (DANCAVAS) Trial https://t.co/xjFFFoY5j2