ArticlePloS one2022
Healthcare worker-based opportunistic screening for familial hypercholesterolemia in a low-resource setting.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case detection of familial hypercholesterolemia using various criteria during an annual health examination in the workplace.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2024Article
- World Heart Federation Cholesterol Roadmap 2022.Global heart · 2022Review
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND &
objectiveHeterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (FHeH) is important risk factor for premature coronary artery disease (CAD). Strategies for its diagnosis and prevalence have not been well studied in India. We performed healthcare worker-based opportunistic screening to assess feasibility for determining its prevalence.
methodsA healthcare worker was trained in use of Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria for diagnosis of FHeH. Successive eligible individuals (n = 3000 of 3450 screened) presenting to biochemistry laboratories of two hospitals for blood lipid measurements were evaluated for FHeH. Cascade screening or genetic studies were not performed. Descriptive statistics are reported.
resultsWe included 2549 participants (men 1870, women 679) not on statin therapy. Health worker screened 25-30 individuals/day in 6-10 minutes each. The mean age was 46.2±11y. Variables of DLCN criteria were more in women vs men: family history 51.1 vs 35.6%, past CAD 48.2 vs 20.1%, arcus cornealis 1.1 vs 0.3%, tendon xanthoma 0.3 vs 0.1%, and LDL cholesterol 190-249 mg/dl in 8.5 vs 2.4%, 250-329 mg/dl in 0.7 vs 0% and ≥330 mg/dl in 0.3 vs 0% (p<0.01). Definite FHeH (DLCN score >8) was in 15 (0.59%, frequency 1:170) and probable FHeH (score 6-8) in 87 (3.4%, frequency 1:29). The prevalence was significantly greater in women, age <50y and in those with hypertension, diabetes and known CAD.
conclusionsHealthcare worker-led opportunistic screening for diagnosis of FHeH using DLCN criteria is feasible in low-resource settings. The results show significant prevalence of clinically detected definite and probable FHeH in the population studied.
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.