ArticleJournal of clinical lipidology
Utilizing innovative implementation strategies for familial hypercholesterolemia: Implementation outcomes from the IMPACT-FH study.
Article in Journal of clinical lipidology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Public attitudes toward cascade genetic screening in the United States.Health affairs scholar · 2026Article
- Digital Educational Strategies to Implement Evidence-Based Care for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2026Review
- Reporting Modifications from the IMPACT-FH Study Using the FRAME-IS.Public health genomics · 2025Article
- Innovative Implementation Strategies for Familial Hypercholesterolemia Cascade Testing: The Impact of Genetic Counseling.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCascade testing can be highly effective in identifying individuals with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and help prevent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The IMPACT-FH cascade testing program offered multiple optimized implementation strategies to improve FH cascade testing uptake.
objectiveGuided by the Conceptual Model of Implementation Research, this study assessed the IMPACT-FH cascade testing program's implementation outcomes.
methodsImplementation outcomes were assessed qualitatively and quantitatively. Interviews were conducted with 33 IMPACT-FH program participants including 15 probands, 12 relatives, and 6 healthcare professionals (HCPs). Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis to investigate implementation outcomes. Descriptive statistics were analyzed for scaled implementation outcome measures asked after interviews.
resultsParticipants described adopting strategies offered in the IMPACT-FH program because they presented an opportunity to pursue low-cost FH cascade testing. Participants identified barriers to feasibility including: the complexity of disclosing an FH result and offering strategies, inherent limitations of probands choosing strategies, confusion over testing costs, limitations sharing with relatives' clinicians, discomfort with chatbot technology, and concerns about the workload for HCPs. Participants evaluated the program positively regarding its appropriateness (Mean (M) = 4.70, Standard Deviation (SD) = 0.41), acceptability (M = 4.79, SD = 0.40), and feasibility (M = 4.24, SD = 0.53).
conclusionThe IMPACT-FH cascade testing program and its strategies were evaluated as valuable to adopt and highly appropriate, acceptable, and feasible by participants. Participants identified areas to enhance the program that could improve FH cascade testing uptake.
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.