ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2022
Electronic health record-based facilitation of familial hypercholesterolaemia detection sensitivity of different algorithms in genetically confirmed patients.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 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.
- Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Prevalence and Discrepancy between Genotype and Phenotype. Findings of the Population-based Hamburg City Health Study.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2025Observational
- Familial Hypercholesterolemia: Pitfalls and Challenges in Diagnosis and Treatment.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Review
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
Abstract
Aims: Familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) is a disorder of LDL cholesterol clearance, resulting in increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Recently, we developed a Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria-based algorithm to facilitate FH detection in electronic health records (EHRs). In this study, we investigated the sensitivity of this and other algorithms in a genetically confirmed FH population. Methods and results: All patients with a healthcare insurance-related coded diagnosis of 'primary dyslipidaemia' between 2018 and 2020 were assessed for genetically confirmed FH. Data were extracted at the time of genetic confirmation of FH (T1) and during the first visit in 2018-2020 (T2). We assessed the sensitivity of algorithms on T1 and T2 for DLCN ≥ 6 and compared with other algorithms [familial hypercholesterolaemia case ascertainment tool (FAMCAT), Make Early Diagnoses to Prevent Early Death (MEDPED), and Simon Broome (SB)] using EHR-coded data and using all available data (i.e. including non-coded free text). 208 patients with genetically confirmed FH were included. The sensitivity (95% CI) on T1 and T2 with EHR-coded data for DLCN ≥ 6 was 19% (14-25%) and 22% (17-28%), respectively. When using all available data, the sensitivity for DLCN ≥ 6 was 26% (20-32%) on T1 and 28% (22-34%) on T2. For FAMCAT, the sensitivity with EHR-coded data on T1 was 74% (67-79%) and 32% (26-39%) on T2, whilst sensitivity with all available data was 81% on T1 (75-86%) and 45% (39-52%) on T2. For Make Early Diagnoses to Prevent Early Death MEDPED and SB, using all available data, the sensitivity on T1 was 31% (25-37%) and 17% (13-23%), respectively. Conclusions: The FAMCAT algorithm had significantly better sensitivity than DLCN, MEDPED, and SB. FAMCAT has the best potential for FH case-finding using EHRs.
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.