English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

To the Editor: We read with great interest the article “Association of uric acid with vascular stiffness in the Framingham Heart Study” by Mehta et al.1 highlighting the association of serum uric acid with carotid-radial and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) in patients of the third generation of the Framingham Heart Study. We noticed that the authors did not specify the type of cfPWV used in their study, whether in the abstract or in the core of the article. This absence of specific denomination of the PWV used is very frequent in articles focused on cfPWV.2,3 cfPWV is calculated as the travel distance divided by the carotid-femoral transit time (cfPWV = travel distance/ transit time) although there are several ways to calculate cfPWV depending on the distance used in the formula.4,5 The choice of distance used is crucial because it can lead to differences of up to 20% in terms of cfPWV.6 Briefly, four types of PWV are usually utilized:

Carotid-Femoral Pulse Wave Velocity: An Urgent Need for a Harmonization of Denominations