ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018
Measurement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels in Primary and Secondary Prevention Patients: Insights From the PALM Registry.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gaps in lipid management among high-risk patients without prior MI or stroke: the VESALIUS-REAL global study.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026Article
- Primary Prevention of Dyslipidemia: 10 Practice-Changing Takeaways from the 2026 ACC/AHA Multisociety Guideline.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- Demystifying the nuances of the lipid patient: a guide for primary care providers.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Review
- Temporal trends and racial/ethnic- and sex-differences in LDL cholesterol control among US adults with self-reported atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2024Article
- Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Testing Following Myocardial Infarction Hospitalization Among Medicare Beneficiaries.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Association of Low-Density Lipoprotein Testing After an Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Event with Subsequent Statin Adherence and Intensification.The American journal of medicine · 2022Article
- Application of the very high risk criterion and evaluation of cholesterol guideline adherence in acute myocardial infarction patients at an urban academic medical center.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2022Article
- Lipid Monitoring After Initiation of Lipid-Lowering Therapies: Return of Performance Measures?Current cardiology reports · 2021Review
- Measurement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels in Primary and Secondary Prevention Patients: Insights From the PALM Registry.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults recommended testing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( LDL -C) to identify untreated patients with LDL -C ≥190 mg/dL, assess lipid-lowering therapy adherence, and consider nonstatin therapy. We sought to determine whether clinician lipid testing practices were consistent with these guidelines. Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry enrolled primary and secondary prevention patients from 140 US cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care offices in 2015 and captured demographic data, lipid treatment history, and the highest LDL -C level in the past 2 years. Core laboratory lipid levels were drawn at enrollment. Among 7627 patients, 2787 (36.5%) had no LDL -C levels measured in the 2 years before enrollment. Patients without chart-documented LDL -C levels were more often women, nonwhite, uninsured, and non-college graduates (all P<0.01). Patients without prior lipid testing were less likely to receive statin treatment (72.6% versus 76.0%; P=0.0034), a high-intensity statin (21.5% versus 24.3%; P=0.016), nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy (24.8% versus 27.3%; P=0.037), and had higher core laboratory LDL -C levels at enrollment (median 97 versus 92 mg/dL; P<0.0001) than patients with prior LDL -C testing. Of 166 individuals with core laboratory LDL -C levels ≥190 mg/dL, 36.1% had no LDL -C measurement in the prior 2 years, and 57.2% were not on a statin at the time of enrollment. Conclusions In routine clinical practice, LDL -C testing is associated with higher-intensity lipid-lowering treatment and lower achieved LDL -C levels.
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.