ReviewCirculation2016
Recent Update to the US Cholesterol Treatment Guidelines: A Comparison With International Guidelines.
Review in Circulation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- The risk of ischemic stroke and hemorrhagic stroke in Chinese adults with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations < 70 mg/dL.BMC medicine · 2021Trial
- Fasting-mimicking diet and markers/risk factors for aging, diabetes, cancer, and cardiovascular disease.Science translational medicine · 2017Trial
- Standard cardiovascular risk prediction scores underestimate risk in immune-mediated thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura survivors.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Cumulative Incidence of Mortality Associated with Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic (CKM) Syndrome.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2025Article
- Effects of statins in patients with coronary artery spasm: A nationwide population-based study.Clinical and translational science · 2024Article
- The association between lipid parameters and erectile dysfunction: a two-sample Mendelian randomization and case-control study.Endocrine · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of applying high-sensitivity troponin I to a score for cardiovascular risk prediction in asymptomatic population.PloS one · 2024Article
- Lipid Profiles and Atrial Fibrillation in Ischemic Stroke Patients Treated with Thrombectomy: Experience from a Tertiary Italian Stroke Hospital.Cardiovascular & hematological agents in medicinal chemistry · 2024Article
- Angiographic severity of coronary artery disease and the influence of major cardiovascular risk factors.Ghana medical journal · 2023Article
- Coenzyme Q10 Supplementation in Statin Treated Patients: A Double-Blinded Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Should mutant TP53 be targeted for cancer therapy?Cell death and differentiation · 2022Review
- Beyond 10-Year Risk: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Statins for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease.Circulation · 2022Article
- Contribution of obesity and cardiometabolic risk factors in developing cardiovascular disease: a population-based cohort study.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The association of Carbohydrate Quality Index with cardiovascular disease risk factors among women with overweight and obesity: A cross-sectional study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- The Molecular Basis of Predicting Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk.Circulation research · 2021Review
- Three Statistical Approaches for Assessment of Intervention Effects: A Primer for Practitioners.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2021Article
- Statin Treatment in Specific Patient Groups: Role for Improved Cardiovascular Risk Markers.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Article
- Burden of comorbidities is higher among elderly survivors of oropharyngeal cancer compared with controls.Cancer · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol guideline advocated several changes from the previous Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Assuming full implementation, the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline would identify ≈13 million Americans as newly eligible for consideration of statin therapy. Three features of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline primarily responsible for these differences are the specific risk assessment tool endorsed, the risk threshold considered sufficient to warrant primary prevention statin therapy, and the decision not to include cholesterol treatment targets. There is no consensus among international guidelines on the optimal approach to these 3 components. The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommends assessing absolute risk with the Pooled Cohort equations, which were developed to improve on previous risk assessment models by including stroke as an outcome and by broadening racial and geographic diversity. Each of the leading international guidelines recommends a different equation for absolute risk assessment. The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline advises consideration of statin therapy for an estimated 10-year risk of atherosclerotic vascular disease of ≥7.5%, which is lower than the thresholds recommended by other leading international guidelines. Lastly, the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline does not endorse a treat-to-target strategy but instead specifies the appropriate intensity of statin for each risk category. This approach is shared by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines but differs from other international guidelines. In this review, we summarize the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline recommendations and compare them with recommendations from Adult Treatment Panel III and other leading international guidelines.
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.