Carotid Intima-Media Thickness

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD

Low carotid intima-media thickness (below the 25th percentile) was the second-strongest negative risk marker after CAC=0, providing moderate downgrading of CHD and CVD risk after adjustment for tradit

Effect: improvement; DLR 0.65 (SD 0.04) for all CHD; DLR 0.75 (SD 0.04) for CVD