Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19476583›Full record

Trial reportPreventive cardiology2009

Appropriateness of cholesterol management in primary care by sex and level of cardiovascular risk.

Ann Hiott Barham, David C Goff, Haiying Chen, Aarthi Balasubramanyam, Erica Rosenberger, Denise E Bonds, Alain G Bertoni

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Preventive cardiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Physicians' behavior following changes in LDL cholesterol target goals.Israel journal of health policy research · 2015
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2013 · on this map
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ann Hiott BarhamDepartment of Family and Community Medicine, Wake Forest University, School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1084, USA. annhiott@hotmail.com
David C Goff
Haiying Chen
Aarthi Balasubramanyam
Erica Rosenberger
Denise E Bonds
Alain G Bertoni
Wake Forest University · USFaculty of Public Health · GB

Funding

Personal Digital Assistant for Guideline Adherence TrialR01HL070742 · NHLBI · WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI GOFF, DAVID C · 2002 to 2006
$3.6M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL070742NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL70742
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A study was undertaken to ascertain the appropriateness of lipid screening and management per the Third Report of the Adult Treatment Panel National Cholesterol Education Program (ATP III) guideline in a sample of North Carolina primary care practices. Demographics, cholesterol values, and comorbid conditions were abstracted from the medical records from 60 community practices participating in a randomized practice-based trial (Guideline Adherence for Heart Health). Eligible patients were aged 21 to 84 years, seen during the baseline period of June 1, 2001, through May 31, 2003, and who were not taking lipid-lowering therapy. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to assess whether age, sex, race/ethnicity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, ATP III risk category, or pretreatment low-density lipoprotein (LDL) influenced treatment. Among 5031 eligible patients, 1711 (34.5%) received screening lipid profiles. Screening rates were higher with older age, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. No large differences were seen by sex. Among patients screened (mean age, 51.6 years; 57.9% female), 76.6% were appropriately managed within 4 months. In adjusted analyses, older age was associated with less appropriate treatment (odds ratio [OR] per 5 years, 0.91; P=.01), and patients with LDL cholesterol <or=130 mg/dL (OR, 18.8; P<.001) and the low-risk group (OR, 27.5; P<.001) were more likely to be managed appropriately compared with patients with LDL >or=190 mg/dL and those at high risk. Among 375 patients eligible for drug treatment, those with LDL levels between 131 and 159 mg/dL were much less likely to be treated (OR, 0.15; P<.001) compared with those with LDL >190 mg/dL, whereas risk category did not influence treatment. The challenge facing implementation of ATP III guidelines is much greater for intermediate- and high-risk patients than for low-risk patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnticholesteremic AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesCholesterolFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHypercholesterolemiaMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedNorth CarolinaPrevalencePrimary Health CareAnticholesteremic AgentsCholesterol

Identifiers

PMID19476583
PMCPMC2937269
OpenAlexW2084929556

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.