Trial reportPreventive cardiology2009
Appropriateness of cholesterol management in primary care by sex and level of cardiovascular risk.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multimorbidity and Patient Safety Incidents in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Predictors of cholesterol treatment discussions and statin prescribing for primary cardiovascular disease prevention in community health centers.Preventive medicine · 2016 · on this mapTrial
- Statin prescription among patients with type 2 diabetes in Botswana: findings and implications.BMC endocrine disorders · 2020Article
- Article
- Physicians' behavior following changes in LDL cholesterol target goals.Israel journal of health policy research · 2015Article
- Screening strategies for cardiovascular disease in asymptomatic adults.Primary care · 2014Review
- Statins in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2013 · on this mapReview
- Article
- Results of a national survey on OTC medicines, Part 2: Do pharmacists support switching prescription agents to over-the-counter status?Canadian pharmacists journal : CPJ = Revue des pharmaciens du Canada : RPC · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
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
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.