Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31332544›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2019

Extreme Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) Risk Recognition.

Paul D Rosenblit

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current diabetes reports, 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 49 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Paul D RosenblitDepartment Medicine, Division Endocrinology, Diabetes, Metabolism, University California, Irvine (UCI), School of Medicine, Irvine, CA, 92697, USA. pdrosenblit@yahoo.com.
University of California, Irvine · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewTo distinguish extreme and very high atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) event risk based on prospective epidemiological studies and clinical trial results. RECENT

findingsClinical practice guidelines have categorized patients with either a history of one or more "clinical ASCVD" events or "coronary heart disease (CHD) risk equivalency" to be at "very high risk" for a recurrence or a first event, respectively. A 20% or greater 10-year ASCVD risk for a composite 3-point "major" atherosclerotic cardiovascular event (MACE) of non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death can serve as an arbitrary definition of those at "very high risk." Exclusion of stroke may underestimate risk of "hard" endpoint 10-year ASCVD risk and addition of other potential endpoints, e.g., hospital admission for unstable angina or revascularization, a 5-point composite MACE, may overinflate the risk definitions and categorization. "Extreme" risk, a descriptor for even higher morbidity and mortality potential, defines a 30% or greater 10-year 3-point MACE (ASCVD) risk. In prospective, epidemiological studies and randomized clinical trial (RCT) participants with an initial acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within several months of entry into the study meet the inclusion criteria assignment for extreme risk. In survivors beyond the first year of an ASCVD event, "extreme" risk persists when one or more comorbidities are present, including diabetes, heart failure (HF), stage 3 or higher chronic kidney disease (CKD), familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), and poorly controlled major risk factors such as hypertension and persistent tobaccoism. "Extreme" risk particularly applies to those with progressive or multiple clinical ASCVD events in the same artery, same arterial bed, or polyvascular sites, including unstable angina and transient ischemic events. Identifying asymptomatic individuals with extensive subclinical ASCVD at "extreme" risk is a challenge, as risk engine assessment may not be adequate; individuals with genetic FH or those with diabetes and Agatston coronary artery calcification (CAC) scores greater than 1000 exemplify such threatening settings and opportunities for aggressive primary prevention. Heterogeneity exists among individuals at risk for clinical ASCVD events; identifying those at "extreme" risk, a more ominous ASCVD category, associated with greater morbidity and mortality, should prompt the most effective global cardiometabolic risk reduction.

Indexed as

AtherosclerosisCardiovascular DiseasesHumansProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsAtherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)Extreme riskMajor atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk (MACE)Multi-morbiditiesSecondary preventionVery high risk

Identifiers

PMID31332544
OpenAlexW2963118259

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.