Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31054643›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet. Public health2019

Detection of familial hypercholesterolaemia: external validation of the FAMCAT clinical case-finding algorithm to identify patients in primary care.

Stephen Weng, Joe Kai, Ralph Akyea, Nadeem Qureshi

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet. Public health, 2019. 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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A case report of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia withEuropean heart journal. Case reports · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen WengPrimary Care Stratified Medicine (PRISM), Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. Electronic address: stephen.weng@nottingham.ac.uk.
Joe KaiPrimary Care Stratified Medicine (PRISM), Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Ralph AkyeaPrimary Care Stratified Medicine (PRISM), Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Nadeem QureshiPrimary Care Stratified Medicine (PRISM), Division of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
University of Nottingham · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe vast majority of individuals with familial hypercholesterolaemia in the general population remain unidentified worldwide. Recognising patients most likely to have the condition, to enable targeted specialist assessment and treatment, could prevent major coronary morbidity and mortality. We aimed to evaluate a clinical case-finding algorithm, the familial hypercholesterolaemia case ascertainment tool (FAMCAT), and compare it with currently recommended methods for detection of familial hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.

methodsIn this external validation study, FAMCAT regression equations were applied to a retrospective cohort of patients aged 16 years or older with cholesterol assessed, who were randomly selected from 1500 primary care practices across the UK contributing to the QResearch database. In the main analysis, we assessed the ability of FAMCAT to detect familial hypercholesterolaemia (ie, its discrimination) and compared it with that of other established clinical case-finding approaches recommended internationally (Simon Broome, Dutch Lipid Clinic Network, Make Early Diagnosis to Prevent Early Deaths [MEDPED] and cholesterol concentrations higher than the 99th percentile of the general population in the UK). We assessed discrimination by area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC; ranging from 0·5, indicating pure chance, to 1, indicating perfect discrimination). Using a probability threshold of more than 1 in 500 (prevalence of familial hypercholesterolaemia), we also assessed sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values in the main analysis.

findingsA sample of 750 000 patients who registered in 1500 UK primary care practices that contribute anonymised data to the QResearch database between Jan 1, 1999, and Sept 1, 2017, was randomly selected, of which 747 000 patients were assessed. FAMCAT showed a high degree of discrimination (AUROC 0·832, 95% CI 0·820-0·845), which was higher than that of Simon Broome criteria (0·694, 0·681-0·703), Dutch Lipid Clinic Network criteria (0·724, 0·710-0·738), MEDPED criteria (0·624, 0·609-0·638), and screening cholesterol concentrations higher than the 99th percentile (0·581, 0·570-0·591). Using a 1 in 500 probability threshold, FAMCAT achieved a sensitivity of 84% (1028 predicted vs 1219 observed cases) and specificity of 60% (443 949 predicted vs 745 781 observed non-cases), with a corresponding positive predictive value of 0·84% and a negative predictive value of 99·2%.

interpretationFAMCAT identifies familial hypercholesterolaemia with greater accuracy than currently recommended approaches and could be considered for clinical case finding of patients with the highest likelihood of having hypercholesterolaemia in primary care.

fundingUK National Institute for Health Research School for Primary Care Research.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAlgorithmsFemaleHumansHyperlipoproteinemia Type IIMaleMass ScreeningMiddle AgedPrimary Health CareReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID31054643
PMCPMC6506568
OpenAlexW2942600000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.