ReviewClinical cardiology2022
The role of coronary artery calcium in allocating pharmacotherapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: The ABCs of CAC.
Review in Clinical cardiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brazilian Guidelines of Hypertension - 2025.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2025Article
- CT coronary artery calcification score as a prognostic marker in COVID-19.Journal of thoracic disease · 2023Article
- Ultra-High-Resolution Electrocardiography Enables Earlier Detection of Transmural and Subendocardial Myocardial Ischemia Compared to Conventional Electrocardiography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Vascular aging and cardiovascular disease: pathophysiology and measurement in the coronary arteries.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
- The role of coronary artery calcium in allocating pharmacotherapy for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: The ABCs of CAC.Clinical cardiology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Determining optimal candidates for the numerous potential pharmacotherapies for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remains challenging. Selective use of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scoring is recommended by the 2018 and 2019 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Cholesterol and Primary Prevention Guidelines as a tool for refining cardiovascular disease risk assessment. A growing body of research shows that CAC has potential value in allocation of primary prevention aspirin, determining blood pressure targets and treatment intensity, the intensity of cholesterol management, and use of the more expensive medications for type 2 diabetes. We also review the literature regarding very elevated CAC scores greater than 400 or 1000 and how these scores appear to confer a risk for cardiovascular disease on par with secondary prevention cohorts.
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.