ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2014
Missed opportunities in prevention of cardiovascular disease in primary care: a cross-sectional study.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the Effectiveness of Primary Care Health Checks at Assessing Cardiovascular Risks among Ethnic Minorities in the UK: A Systematic Review.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Sex Differences in Cardiovascular Medication Prescription in Primary Care: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Pooled it
- Guideline adherence for the management of cardiovascular disease in primary care: a scoping review.Family practice · 2026Article
- Prevalence, diagnosis gap, and treatment patterns of hypertension in a primary care electronic health record cohort in Qatar: a retrospective cross-sectional study.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Stroke Action Plan for Europe 2018-2030 (SAP-E): mid-term review and update.European stroke journal · 2026Review
- Sex-based utilization of guideline recommended statin therapy and cardiovascular disease outcomes: Data from a multisite healthcare network primary prevention cohort.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2024Article
- Missed opportunities for initiation of treatment and control of hypertension among older adults in India.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Impact of multiple cardiovascular medications on mortality after an incidence of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.BMC medicine · 2021Article
- Differences in Cardiovascular Care Between Adults With and Without Opioid Prescriptions in the United States.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Article
- General practitioners' reasoning on risk screening and primary prevention of stroke - a focus group study.BMC family practice · 2018Article
- Time trends in statin use and incidence of recurrent cardiovascular events in secondary prevention between 1999 and 2013: a registry-based study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2018Article
- Impact of Gender on Satisfaction and Confidence in Cholesterol Control Among Veterans at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease.Journal of women's health (2002) · 2017Article
- Article
- Statin Adherence: Does Gender Matter?Current atherosclerosis reports · 2016Review
- Statins are underused in recent-onset Parkinson's disease with increased vascular risk: findings from the UK Tracking Parkinson's and Oxford Parkinson's Disease Centre (OPDC) discovery cohorts.Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry · 2016Article
- Prevalence and costs of treating uncomplicated stage 1 hypertension in primary care: a cross-sectional analysis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
- Variations in statin prescribing for primary cardiovascular disease prevention: cross-sectional analysis.BMC health services research · 2014Article
- The effect of clinical inertia on the management of blood pressure.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundScreening cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk is an important part of CVD prevention. The success of screening is dependent on the rigour with which treatments are subsequently prescribed. AIM To establish the extent to which treatment conforms to guidelines. DESIGN AND
settingCross-sectional study of anonymised patient records from 19 general practices in the UK.
methodData relating to patient characteristics, including CVD risk factors, risk score and prescribed medication were extracted. CVD risk (thus eligibility for cholesterol and blood pressure-lowering treatment) was calculated using the Framingham equation. Guideline adherence was defined with descriptive statistics and comparisons by age, sex and disease were made using χ(2) tests.
resultsOf the 34 975 patients (aged 40-74 years) included in this study, 2550 (7%) patients had existing CVD and 12 349 (35%) had a calculable CVD risk or were on treatment. CVD risk was formally assessed in 8390 (24%) patients. Approximately 7929 (64%) patients eligible for primary prevention therapy were being treated appropriately for their CVD risk. Guideline adherence was higher in younger patients (6284 [69%] aged 40-64 years versus 1645 [50%] aged 65-74 years, P<0.001) and in females (4334 [69%] females versus 3595 [59%] males, P<0.001). There was no difference in guideline adherence between patients where CVD risk had been recorded and those where CVD was calculable. Guideline adherence in patients with existing CVD was highest in patients with ischaemic heart disease (866 [ischaemic heart disease], 52%, versus 288 [stroke], 46%, versus 276 [other CVD], 39%; P<0.001).
conclusionThere is scope for improvement in assessment and treatment for prevention of CVD in clinical practice. Increasing the uptake of evidence-based treatments would improve the cost-effectiveness of CVD risk screening programmes.
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.