Observational studyAtencion primaria2018
[Dyslipidemia management in patients with high cardiovascular risk in Spain. ALMA study].
Observational study in Atencion primaria, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends and determinants of prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of dyslipidaemia in canton of Geneva, 2005-2019: Potent statins are underused.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2023Article
- COSMIC project: consensus on the objectives of the metabolic syndrome in clinic.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the attitude of primary care (PCPs) and specialized care (SCPs) physicians towards the general set of patients with dyslipidemia, particularly those with cardiovascular risk factors.
designObservational, descriptive, multi-center study based on a survey. LOCATION: Different healthcare regions in Spain.
participants1,402 PCPs, and 596 SCPs. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Physician's profile, routine practices in the management of patients with dyslipidemia.
results84.3% took the global cardiovascular risk into account when prescribing the treatment. Target LDL-C concentration in patients without cardiovascular risk factors was <130mg/dL and <160mg/dL for 51.9% and 29.0% of physicians, respectively. In smokers and patients with hypertension or diabetes, the LDL target was <100mg/dL for 49-55% of physicians, whereas in patients with cardiovascular complication, ischemic cardiopathy or stroke, target LDL-C was <70mg/dL in 71-88% of them. First-line treatment for patients without cardiovascular risk factors was atorvastatin (66%), whereas in patients with diabetes, kidney disease or metabolic syndrome, most physicians (80-89%) used pitavastatin. SCPs showed a greater trend than PCPs to establish a LDL-C target of <70mg/dL in patients with previous stroke (77.5% vs 66.8%) or coronary disease (92.1% vs 80.6%) (P<.0001), as well as to prescribe a combined treatment in patients not achieving the target LDL-C concentrations (58.1% vs 50.2%, P=.0013).
conclusionsAlthough CVR assessment is generally accepted, there is broad disagreement in defining the objectives of LDL-C. Most often than PCPs, the SCPs consider more ambitious targets for LDL-C and the association of lipid-lowering drugs.
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.