Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30371214›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018

Measurement of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels in Primary and Secondary Prevention Patients: Insights From the PALM Registry.

Angela M Lowenstern, Shuang Li, Ann Marie Navar, Veronique L Roger, Jennifer G Robinson, Anne C Goldberg, Salim S Virani, L Veronica Lee, Peter W F Wilson, Michael J Louie and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. 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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
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

12 authors.

Angela M Lowenstern1 Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.
Shuang Li1 Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.
Ann Marie Navar1 Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.
Veronique L Roger2 Department of Health Sciences Research and Division of Cardiovascular Diseases Mayo Clinic Rochester MN.
Jennifer G Robinson3 University of Iowa Iowa City IA.
Anne C Goldberg4 Washington University St. Louis MO.
Salim S Virani5 Baylor College of Medicine Houston TX.
L Veronica Lee6 Sanofi Bridgewater CT.
Peter W F Wilson7 Emory University Atlanta GA.
Michael J Louie8 Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Tarrytown NY.
Eric D Peterson1 Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.
Tracy Y Wang1 Duke Clinical Research Institute Durham NC.

Funding

Preventing Cardiovascular Disease through Improved Risk Prediction and CommunicationK01HL133416 · NHLBI · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI NAVAR, ANN MARIE · 2016 to 2020
$707k
NHLBI NIH HHS K01 HL133416
6 · The paper itself

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

Patient ComplianceRegistriesAgedBiomarkersCardiovascular DiseasesCholesterol, LDLFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsIncidenceMalePrimary PreventionRetrospective StudiesSecondary PreventionTreatment OutcomeBiomarkersCholesterol, LDLHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitorsclinician lipid testing practicesguideline adherencelow‐density lipoprotein cholesterol

Identifiers

PMID30371214
PMCPMC6222939

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.