4.7 Article

Identification of risk factors for retinal vascular events in a population-based cross-sectional study in Rumoi, Japan

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-85655-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. Asahikawa Medical University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that self-reported diabetes mellitus was a significant risk factor for retinal vascular events in both men and women, while higher systolic blood pressure and lower frequency of meat consumption were associated with the events in men. In women, self-reported hypertension was linked to retinal vascular events, but not with systolic blood pressure. Women with hypertension may require extra care beyond blood pressure management.
We conducted a population-based, cross-sectional study in Japan to identify risk factors for retinal vascular events separately by gender. Forty years or older participants were recruited. Fundus photographs were taken, and lifestyle and health characteristics were determined through a questionnaire and physical examinations. We compared the group of those who had retinal vascular events and those who did not. A total of 1689 participants (964 men) were deemed eligible for the study and retinal vascular events were seen in 59 subjects (3.7% of the men, 3.2% of the women). Self-reported diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with the vascular events in each gender [odds ratio (OR)=6.97, 6.19 (men, women); 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.02-15.9, 2.25-17.0; p<0.001]. Higher systolic blood pressure (OR=1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.04; p=0.006) and lower frequency of meat consumption (OR=0.73; 95% CI 0.54-0.99; p=0.04) were independently associated with the vascular events in men. In women, while vascular events were associated with self-reported hypertension (OR=2.64; 95% CI 1.03-6.74; p=0.04), no association was seen with systolic blood pressure. Women with hypertension may need extra care, not only for blood pressure.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据