Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12639870›Full record

ArticleHeart (British Cardiac Society)2003

Evolution of statin prescribing 1994-2001: a case of agism but not of sexism?

S DeWilde, I M Carey, S A Bremner, N Richards, S R Hilton, D G Cook

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heart (British Cardiac Society), 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 141 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: modelling guidelines and patient preferences based on an Irish cohort.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2019
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Statin use among older Finns stratified according to cardiovascular risk.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

S DeWildeDepartment of General Practice & Primary Care, St George's Hospital Medical School, London, UK.
I M Carey
S A Bremner
N Richards
S R Hilton
D G Cook
St George's, University of London · GBSt George's Hospital · GBWWF-UK · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo study trends in the use of lipid lowering drugs in the UK, and to assess which patient factors influence prescribing.

methodsRoutinely collected computerised medical data were analysed from 142 general practices across England and Wales that provide data for the Doctors' Independent Network database. Subjects included were people aged 35 years or more with treated ischaemic heart disease, averaging annually over 30,000. The temporal trend from 1994 to 2001 in prescription of lipid lowering drugs and daily statin dose and the odds ratios (ORs) for receiving a statin prescription in 1998 were examined.

resultsLipid lowering drug prescribing increased greatly over time, entirely because of statins, so that in 2001 56.3% of men and 41.1% of women with ischaemic heart disease received lipid lowering drugs. However, 33% of these patients were on a < 20 mg simvastatin daily equivalent. In 1998 the OR for receiving a statin fell from 1 at age 55-64 to 0.64 at 65-74 and 0.16 at 75-84 years. The age effect was similar in those without major comorbidity. Revascularised patients were much more likely to receive a statin than those with angina (OR 3.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.57 to 4.31). Men were more likely to receive a statin than women (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.54 to 1.71) but this difference disappeared after adjustment for age and severity of disease (OR 1.06). Geographical region had little effect but there was a very weak socioeconomic gradient.

conclusionsAlthough prescribing has increased, many patients who may benefit from lipid lowering drugs either do not receive it or are undertreated, possibly because of lack of awareness of the relative potency of the different statins. Patients with angina and the elderly are less likely to receive treatment that may prevent a coronary event.

Indexed as

PrejudiceAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsEnglandFamily PracticeFemaleHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial IschemiaPractice Patterns, Physicians'Sex FactorsTime FactorsHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID12639870
PMCPMC1769253
OpenAlexW2124509076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.