| Title |
Tumor necrosis factor-alpha G-238A polymorphism and coronary artery disease risk: a meta-analysis of 4,222 patients and 4,832 controls
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, September 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/tcrm.s87598 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xian-Ping Hua, Xiao-Dong Zhang, Joey SW Kwong, Xian-Tao Zeng, Zhen-Jian Zhang, Wan-Lin Wei |
| Abstract |
The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) gene G-238A polymorphism and risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) using a meta-analytical approach. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for relevant publications up to January 13, 2015. Four authors (XPH, XDZ, XTZ, and ZJZ) independently selected the studies, extracted, and analyzed the data using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. The sensitivity and subgroups analyses were also performed. Either a fixed effects or a random effects model was used to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Finally, ten articles including eleven case-control studies involving 4,222 patients and 4,832 controls were yielded. The results indicated no significant association between G-238A polymorphism and CAD risk (A vs G: OR =1.08, 95% CI =0.89-1.30; AA vs GG: OR =1.15, 95% CI =0.59-2.25; GA vs GG: OR =1.14, 95% CI =0.88-1.48; AA vs [GG + GA]: OR =1.09, 95% CI =0.56-2.14; (GA + AA) vs GG: OR =1.11, 95% CI =0.90-1.38). In the subgroup analyses, similar results were obtained with overall populations. The sensitivity analyses showed that the overall results were robust. No publication bias was detected. Based on current evidence, we can conclude that TNF-α G-238A polymorphism might not be associated with CAD risk. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 33% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 25% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 8% |
| Psychology | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 September 2015.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#810
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,817
of 276,789 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#46
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,789 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.