|
|
|
front |1 |2 |3 |4 |5 |6 |7 |8 |9 |10 |11 |12 |13 |14 |15 |16 |17 |18 |19 |20 |21 |22 |23 |24 | 25|26 |27 |28 |29 |30 |31 |32 |33 |34 |35 |36 |37 |38 |39 |40 |41 |42 |43 |44 |45 |46 |47 |48 |review |
 |
DESIGN:
THREE INTERVENTION GROUPS, THREE REFERENCE GROUPS, MATCHED ON SIZE, TYPE AND
DISTANCE FROM MINNEAPOLIS. EVALUATION: INDEPENDENT AND COHORT SAMPLES. RESULTS:NOT SUCCESSFUL IN REDUCING RISK FACTORS MORE THAN FAVOURABLE SECULAR TRENDS, MORTALITY EVALUATION PENDING (LUEPKER ET AL. 1994) |