Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30255362›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in cardiovascular medicine2018

Coronary Artery Calcium: Recommendations for Risk Assessment in Cardiovascular Prevention Guidelines.

Mahmoud Al Rifai, Miguel Cainzos-Achirica, Sina Kianoush, Mohammadhassan Mirbolouk, Allison Peng, Josep Comin-Colet, Michael J Blaha

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine, 2018. 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Subclinical cardiovascular disease and utility of coronary artery calcium score.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2021
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Mahmoud Al RifaiDepartment of Internal Medicine, The University of Kansas School of Medicine, Wichita, KS, USA.
Miguel Cainzos-AchiricaJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Blalock 524D1, 600 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Sina KianoushJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Blalock 524D1, 600 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Mohammadhassan MirboloukJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Blalock 524D1, 600 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Allison PengJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Blalock 524D1, 600 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA.
Josep Comin-ColetDepartment of Cardiology, Bellvitge University Hospital, L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain.
Michael J BlahaJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Blalock 524D1, 600 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA. mblaha1@jhmi.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewIn this review, we evaluate the coronary artery calcium (CAC) score as a biomarker for advanced atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment. RECENT

findingsWe summarize the evidence from multiple epidemiological studies, which show a clear advantage of CAC compared to traditional and non-traditional cardiovascular risk factors. We then compare the recommendations included in the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) and in the 2017 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography (SCCT) guidelines for the use of CAC in ASCVD risk assessment, and examine the recent 2018 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) document. Finally, based on the currently available evidence, we provide constructive input for the upcoming ACC/AHA guidelines, regarding the population in whom CAC is most likely to be informative, the level of evidence that we believe should be assigned to CAC as an advanced ASCVD risk assessment tool, and the special populations in whom CAC might be beneficial for further risk assessment. We support a pragmatic approach that combines the pooled cohort equations (PCE) for initial ASCVD risk stratification, followed by CAC for refining ASCVD risk assessment among a broad range of intermediate risk patients and other special groups.

Indexed as

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseaseCoronary artery calciumPreventionRisk assessmentStatins

Identifiers

PMID30255362

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.