ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2015
Implications of the US cholesterol guidelines on eligibility for statin therapy in the community: comparison of observed and predicted risks in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring Cohort.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2019 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With High Blood Pressure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2019Guideline
- 2019 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With High Blood Pressure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2019Guideline
- 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2019Guideline
- Performance of the Framingham risk models and pooled cohort equations for predicting 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2019Pooled it
- A tool to help patients visualize ASCVD risk and the potential impact of risk-lowering interventions.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2022Article
- Assessment of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Primary Prevention.Journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and prevention · 2022Review
- Ten-year atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score and its components among an Iranian population: a cohort-based cross-sectional study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2022Article
- The Accuracy of Cardiovascular Pooled Cohort Risk Estimates in U.S. Older Adults.Journal of general internal medicine · 2020Article
- 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.Circulation · 2019 · on this mapReview
- Epidemiology of cardiovascular disease in young individuals.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2018Review
- Implications of American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Cholesterol Guidelines on Statin Underutilization for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Diabetes Mellitus Among Several US Networks of Community Health Centers.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Article
- Implementing Cardiovascular Risk Prediction in Clinical Practice: The Future Is Now.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Article
- Use and Customization of Risk Scores for Predicting Cardiovascular Events Using Electronic Health Record Data.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Article
- Accuracy of the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk Equation in a Large Contemporary, Multiethnic Population.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2016Article
- Recent Update to the US Cholesterol Treatment Guidelines: A Comparison With International Guidelines.Circulation · 2016Review
- 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
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundConcerns have been raised that the 2013 atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk estimator overpredicts risk in contemporary cohorts. Whether suboptimal calibration will lead to overtreatment with statins is unknown. We investigated the numbers of people eligible for statin treatment in the Framingham Heart Study Offspring Cohort, based on the 2013 cholesterol guidelines, and estimated the proportion that may be overtreated as a result of potential miscalibration of the ASCVD estimator. METHODS AND
resultsDuring a median follow-up of 10 years, we observed 285 ASCVD events (8.4%; comprising ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction, and coronary artery disease death) among 3396 men and 112 events (2.9%) among 3838 women. Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistics were 16.3 in men (340 predicted versus 285 observed events) and 29.1 in women (166 predicted versus 112 observed events). Overprediction predominantly occurred among women in the highest risk decile and among men in the ≥7th risk deciles, for which observed ASCVD event rates were ≥7.5%. In total, 2615 participants (36%; 867 women) were eligible for statins based on the new guidelines. Of these, 171 women (20%) and 154 men (9%) were reclassified downward (as not eligible for statin therapy) using a recalibrated ASCVD estimator. In the latter group, 18 women (10.5%; 95% CI 5.9% to 15.2%) and 11 men (7.1%; 95% CI 3.0% to 11.3%) experienced ASCVD.
conclusionsThe risk estimator overpredicted ASCVD risk but did so mainly among high-risk participants who would be considered eligible for statin use anyway. Our findings may mitigate concerns regarding the potential impact of miscalibration of the ASCVD estimator in contemporary cohorts.
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.