ArticleTherapeutic advances in chronic disease2019
Net benefit of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 75 years or older: a benefit-harm balance modeling study.
Article in Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The continuous net benefit: assessing the clinical utility of prediction models when informing a continuum of decisions.Diagnostic and prognostic research · 2026Article
- Treating COVID-19: Targeting the Host Response, Not the Virus.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Older adult preferences regarding benefits and harms of statin and aspirin therapy for cardiovascular primary prevention.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2023Article
- Association between willingness to deprescribe and health outcome priorities among U.S. older adults: Results of a national survey.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022Article
- Innovative Strategies to Facilitate Patient-Centered Research in Multiple Chronic Conditions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Assessment of Patient-Preferred Language to Achieve Goal-Aligned Deprescribing in Older Adults.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Global variation of risk thresholds for initiating statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a benefit-harm balance modelling study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe determined the risk thresholds above which statin use would be more likely to provide a net benefit for people over the age of 75 years without history of cardiovascular disease (CVD).
methodsAn exponential model was used to estimate the differences in expected benefit and harms in people treated with statins over a 10-year horizon
resultsBased on average preferences, statins were more likely to provide a net benefit at a 10-year CVD risk of 24% and 25% for men aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively, and 21% for women in both age groups. However, these thresholds varied significantly depending on differences in individual patient preferences for the statin-related outcomes, with interquartile ranges of 21-33% and 23-36% for men aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively, as well as 20-32% and 21-32% for women aged 75-79 years and 80-84 years, respectively.
conclusionsStatins would more likely provide a net benefit for primary prevention in older people taking the average preferences if their CVD risk is well above 20%. However, the thresholds could be much higher or lower depending on preferences of individual patients, which suggests more emphasis should be placed on individual-based decision-making, instead of recommending statins for everyone based on a single or a small number of thresholds.
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.