Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39969794›Full record

ArticleHigh blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension2025

Discrepancies Between Physician-Perceived and Calculated Cardiovascular Risk in Primary Prevention: Implications for LDL-C Target Achievement and Appropriate Lipid-Lowering Therapy.

Arturo Cesaro, Vincenzo Acerbo, Francesco Scialla, Enrica Golia, Claudia Concilio, Gianmaria Scherillo, Gianantonio De Michele, Vincenzo de Sio, Antonio Capolongo, Luisa Di Donato and 7 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Validation of Risk Perception Cut-Offs in Italian Brief PRHDS (PRHDS-BI): Implications for Primary Cardiovascular Prevention.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2026
    Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Arturo CesaroDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4435-1235
Vincenzo AcerboDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0007-1196-7582
Francesco SciallaDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Enrica GoliaDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Claudia ConcilioDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Gianmaria ScherilloDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Gianantonio De MicheleDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Vincenzo de SioDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Antonio CapolongoDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Luisa Di DonatoDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Maria Grazia MonacoDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Simona SperlonganoDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Alberto RuggieroDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Felice GragnanoDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6943-278X
Elisabetta MoscarellaDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy.
Carmine RiccioDivision of Cardiology, A.O.R.N. "Sant'Anna e San Sebastiano", Caserta, Italy.
Paolo CalabròDepartment of Translational Medical Sciences, University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli", Naples, 80131, Italy. paolo.calabro@unicampania.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5018-830X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAccurate risk assessment is critical in cardiovascular (CV) prevention, yet physicians often underestimate CV risk, leading to inadequate preventive measures.

aimThis study evaluates the concordance between physician-perceived CV risk and calculated CV risk in a primary prevention setting.

methodsThis cross-sectional study included primary prevention patients from the Cardiology Outpatient Clinic of Caserta Hospital, Italy. Two independent cardiologists evaluated the physician-perceived risk, and a third resolved discrepancies. CV risk was calculated using SCORE2 for patients with 70 years or less and SCORE2-OP for those with more than 70 years. The concordance between perceived and calculated risks was assessed using Cohen's kappa coefficient. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to examine the influence of risk estimation on achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets recommended by the ESC.

results389 patients had complete data for CV risk calculation. Physician-perceived risk categorized 8.7% of patients as low/moderate, 37.8% as high, and 53.5% as very-high risk. In contrast, calculated CV risk according to the SCORE2/SCORE2-OP classified 8% as low/moderate, 5.7% as high, and 86.4% as very-high risk. The concordance between perceived and calculated CV risk was poor (Cohen's kappa 0.208, p < 0.001). Underestimated patients reached LDL-C targets in 16% of cases, well-estimated in 34.5%, and overestimated in 76.9%. Statin use was significantly lower in patients with underestimated CV risk (29.2%) compared to well-estimated (50%) and overestimated (76.9%) groups (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that patients with overestimated risk were more likely to achieve LDL-C targets (OR 5.33, CI 1.33-21.42, p = 0.018), whereas underestimated patients were 47% less likely (OR 0.53, CI 0.3-0.93, p = 0.027).

conclusionsA significant discrepancy exists between physician-perceived and calculated CV risk, leading to risk underestimation in over one-third of patients. This underestimation is associated with lower LDL-C target achievement and reduced statin use.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelCardiologistsCardiovascular DiseasesCholesterol, LDLDecision Support TechniquesDyslipidemiasHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsHypolipidemic AgentsPerceptionPrimary PreventionAgedBiomarkersCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHeart Disease Risk FactorsBiomarkersCholesterol, LDLHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsHypolipidemic AgentsCardiovascular risk AssessmentLDL-C TargetLipid-lowering TherapyRisk StratificationSCORE2

Identifiers

PMID39969794
PMCPMC11890243

What OpenQuestion holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.