ReviewJournal of the American College of Cardiology2014
Headed in the right direction but at risk for miscalculation: a critical appraisal of the 2013 ACC/AHA risk assessment guidelines.
Review in Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.
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
33 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence of stroke and its predictors among hypertensive patients in Felege Hiwot comprehensive specialized hospital, Bahir Dar, Ethiopia, a retrospective follow-up study.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- A Woman's Heart: Improving Uptake and Awareness of Cardiovascular Screening for Middle-Aged Populations.International journal of women's health · 2023Review
- Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk assessment: An American Society for Preventive Cardiology clinical practice statement.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2022Article
- Breast arterial calcifications as an indicator of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: comparative analysis of coronary computed tomography scoring systems and carotid intima-media thickness.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2022Article
- Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in People Living with HIV: Current Tools and Limitations.Current HIV/AIDS reports · 2021Review
- Further understanding of ideal cardiovascular health score metrics and cardiovascular disease.Expert review of cardiovascular therapy · 2021Review
- Statin eligibility based on the ACC/AHA guidelines among Middle Eastern patients with diabetes mellitus presenting with acute myocardial infarction.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- The Use of Blood Biomarkers in Precision Medicine for the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: a Review.Expert review of precision medicine and drug development · 2021Article
- Same evidence, varying viewpoints: Three questions illustrating important differences between United States and European cholesterol guideline recommendations.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2020Review
- Identification of female-specific risk enhancers throughout the lifespan of women to improve cardiovascular disease prevention.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2020Review
- Article
- Physicians Voluntarily Using an EHR-Based CDS Tool Improved Patients' Guideline-Related Statin Prescription Rates: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Article
- Race/Ethnicity and the Prognostic Implications of Coronary Artery Calcium for All-Cause and Cardiovascular Disease Mortality: The Coronary Artery Calcium Consortium.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Article
- Coronary Artery Calcium: Recommendations for Risk Assessment in Cardiovascular Prevention Guidelines.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018Review
- Cardiovascular Risk Prediction in Korean Adults.Korean journal of family medicine · 2018Article
- Adoption of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Cholesterol Management Guideline in Cardiology Practices Nationwide.JAMA cardiology · 2017 · on this mapArticle
- Clinical Characteristics and Angiographic Findings of Acute Myocardial Infarction Associated With Marijuana Use: Consecutive Case Series.SciFed journal of cardiology · 2017Article
- Lung Cancer Screening Eligibility in the Community: Cardiovascular Risk Factors, Coronary Artery Calcification, and Cardiovascular Events.Circulation · 2016Article
- The Unchartered Frontier: Preventive Cardiology Between the Ages of 15 and 35 Years.Current cardiovascular risk reports · 2016Article
- Providing Evidence for Subclinical CVD in Risk Assessment.Global heart · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The newly released 2013 ACC/AHA Guidelines for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk makes progress compared with previous cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms. For example, the new focus on total atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) is now inclusive of stroke in addition to hard coronary events, and there are now separate equations to facilitate estimation of risk in non-Hispanic white and black individuals and separate equations for women. Physicians may now estimate lifetime risk in addition to 10-year risk. Despite this progress, the new risk equations do not appear to lead to significantly better discrimination than older models. Because the exact same risk factors are incorporated, using the new risk estimators may lead to inaccurate assessment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk in special groups such as younger individuals with unique ASCVD risk factors. In general, there appears to be an overestimation of risk when applied to modern populations with greater use of preventive therapy, although the magnitude of overestimation remains unclear. Because absolute risk estimates are directly used for treatment decisions in the new cholesterol guidelines, these issues could result in overuse of pharmacologic management. The guidelines could provide clearer direction on which individuals would benefit from additional testing, such as coronary calcium scores, for more personalized preventive therapies. We applaud the advances of these new guidelines, and we aim to critically appraise the applicability of the risk assessment tools so that future iterations of the estimators can be improved to more accurately assess risk in individual 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.