Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28432660›Full record

ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2017

Management of Dyslipidemias in Europe and the USA: Same Evidence, Different Conclusions? Can We Find Common Ground?

Ian M Graham, Alberico L Catapano

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current cardiology reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ian M GrahamTrinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland. ian@grahams.net.
Alberico L CatapanoDepartment of Pharmacological and Biomolecular Sciences and IRCCS Multimedica, University of Milan, Via Balzaretti 9, 20133, Milan, Italy.
MultiMedica · ITTrinity College Dublin · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAn examination of the current ACC/AHA and ESC/EAS Guidelines on the management of dyslipidemias for common ground and differences. RECENT

findingsThere is much common ground. Both note that ASCVD is, in most people, the product of a number of risk factors, notably tobacco exposure, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, inactivity, overweight and diabetes. They stress that risk calculators can help in the assessment of risk in apparently healthy persons. Persons with established ASCVD and many with diabetes or renal impairment are at high to very high risk and warrant intensive risk factor advice. The ACC/AHA Guidelines favor the universal use of statins in all high-risk subjects. In contrast, the ESC/EAS Guidelines favor a goal approach based on total risk and baseline LDL cholesterol level. Perhaps the most important challenges are to stress similarities rather than differences and to simplify communications with both healthcare professionals and the public. Subjects with established vascular disease and renal impairment and many with diabetes are at high to very high risk and need intensive risk factor management. A risk chart or calculator is recommended to assess total risk in apparently healthy persons. The higher the risk, the more intense the risk factor management.

Indexed as

Practice Guidelines as TopicCholesterol, LDLDyslipidemiasEuropeHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsRisk FactorsUnited StatesCholesterol, LDLHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsAtherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)Cardiovascular riskCholesterolLDL cholesterolRisk factors

Identifiers

PMID28432660
OpenAlexW2607108629

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.