Recent Update to the US Cholesterol Treatment Guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) cholesterol guideline advocated several changes from the previous Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Assuming full implementation, the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline would identify ≈13 million Americans as newly eligible for consideration of statin therapy. Three features of the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline primarily responsible for these differences are the specific risk assessment tool endorsed, the risk threshold considered sufficient to warrant primary prevention statin therapy, and the decision not to include cholesterol treatment targets. There is no consensus among international guidelines on the optimal approach to these 3 components. The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline recommends assessing absolute risk with the Pooled Cohort equations, which were developed to improve on previous risk assessment models by including stroke as an outcome and by broadening racial and geographic diversity. Each of the leading international guidelines recommends a different equation for absolute risk assessment. The 2013 ACC/AHA guideline advises consideration of statin therapy for an estimated 10-year risk of atherosclerotic vascular disease of ≥7.5%, which is lower than the thresholds recommended by other leading international guidelines. Lastly, the 2013 ACC/AHA guideline does not endorse a treat-to-target strategy but instead specifies the appropriate intensity of statin for each risk category. This approach is shared by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines but differs from other international guidelines. In this review, we summarize the 2013 ACC/AHA cholesterol guideline recommendations and compare them with recommendations from Adult Treatment Panel III and other leading international guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".