ArticleBMJ open2016
Feasibility of improving identification of familial hypercholesterolaemia in general practice: intervention development study.
Article in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Strategies for screening for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care and other community settings.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Reducing Premature Coronary Artery Disease in Malaysia by Early Identification of Familial Hypercholesterolemia Using the Familial Hypercholesterolemia Case Ascertainment Tool (FAMCAT): Protocol for a Mixed Methods Evaluation Study.JMIR research protocols · 2023Article
- Case Series of Genetically Confirmed Index Cases of Familial Hypercholesterolemia in Primary Care.The American journal of case reports · 2023Article
- Family history recording in UK general practice: the lIFeLONG study.Family practice · 2022Article
- Introducing genetic testing with case finding for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care: qualitative study of patient and health professional experience.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Screening Algorithms for Familial Hypercholesterolaemia in Primary Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Case-finding and genetic testing for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2021Article
- Comparing the performance of the novel FAMCAT algorithms and established case-finding criteria for familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.Open heart · 2021Article
- Acceptability, Appropriateness, and Feasibility of Automated Screening Approaches and Family Communication Methods for Identification of Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Stakeholder Engagement Results from the IMPACT-FH Study.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
- Systematic Identification of Familial Hypercholesterolaemia in Primary Care-A Systematic Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- Screening for potential familial hypercholesterolaemia in general practice: an observational study on prevalence and management.BJGP open · 2021Article
- Evaluating a clinical tool (FAMCAT) for identifying familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care: a retrospective cohort study.BJGP open · 2020Article
- Detection of familial hypercholesterolaemia: external validation of the FAMCAT clinical case-finding algorithm to identify patients in primary care.The Lancet. Public health · 2019Article
- Cost-utility analysis of searching electronic health records and cascade testing to identify and diagnose familial hypercholesterolaemia in England and Wales.Atherosclerosis · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the feasibility of improving identification of familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) in primary care, and of collecting outcome measures to inform a future trial.
designFeasibility intervention study.
setting6 general practices (GPs) in central England.
participants831 eligible patients with elevated cholesterol >7.5 mmol/L were identified, by search of electronic health records, for recruitment to the intervention.
interventionEducational session in practice; use of opportunistic computer reminders in consultations or universal postal invitation over 6 months to eligible patients invited to complete a family history questionnaire. Those fulfilling the Simon-Broome criteria for possible FH were invited for GP assessment and referred for specialist definitive diagnosis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of recruitment of eligible patients, identification of patients with possible FH, referral to specialist care, diagnosis of confirmed FH in specialist care; and feasibility of collecting relevant outcome measures for a future trial.
resultsOf 173 general practices, 18 were interested in participating and 6 were recruited. From 831 eligible patients, 127 (15.3%) were recruited and completed family history questionnaires: 86 (10.7%) through postal invitation and 41 (4.9%) opportunistically. Among the 127 patients, 32 (25.6%) had a possible diagnosis of FH in primary care. Within 6 months of completing recruitment, 7 patients had had specialist assessment confirming 2 patients with definite FH (28.6%), and 5 patients with possible FH (71.4%). Potential trial outcome measures for lipid tests, statin prescribing and secondary causes of hypercholesterolaemia were extracted using automated data extraction from electronic records alone without recourse to other methods.
conclusionsThe intervention is feasible to implement in GP, and facilitates recruitment of patients with raised cholesterol for targeted assessment and identification of FH. Extracting data directly from electronic records could be used to evaluate relevant outcome measures in a future trial.
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.