↓ Skip to main content

Lipid management in contemporary community practice: Results from the Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry

Overview of attention for article published in American Heart Journal, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Lipid management in contemporary community practice: Results from the Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) Registry
Published in
American Heart Journal, August 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.08.005
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The latest cholesterol guidelines have shifted focus from achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets toward statin use and intensity guided by atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk. Statin use and intensity were evaluated in 5,905 statin-eligible primary or secondary prevention patients from 138 PALM Registry practices. Overall, 74.7% of eligible adults were on statins; only 42.4% were on guideline-recommended intensity. Relative to primary prevention patients, ASCVD patients were more likely to be on a statin (83.6% vs 63.4%, P<.0001) and guideline-recommended intensity (47.3% vs 36.0%, P<.0001). Men were more likely than women to be prescribed recommended intensity for primary (odds ratio [OR] 1.87, 95% CI 1.49-2.34) and secondary (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.26-1.70) prevention. In primary prevention, increasing age, diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and lower 10-year ASCVD risk were associated with increased odds of receiving recommended intensity. Among ASCVD patients, those with coronary artery disease were more likely to be on recommended intensity than cerebrovascular or peripheral vascular disease patients (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.41-2.09), as were those seen by cardiologists (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.12-1.83). Median LDL-C levels were highest among patients not on statins (124.0 mg/dL) and slightly higher among those on lower-than-recommended intensity compared with recommended-therapy recipients (88.0 and 84.0 mg/dL, respectively; P≤.0001). In routine contemporary practice, 1 in 4 guideline-eligible patients was not on a statin; less than half were on the recommended statin intensity. Untreated and undertreated patients had significantly higher LDL-C levels than those receiving guideline-directed statin treatment.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 67 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 4%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 26 39%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Psychology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 30 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2025.
All research outputs
#983,902
of 32,440,831 outputs
Outputs from American Heart Journal
#134
of 7,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,545
of 347,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Heart Journal
#3
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,440,831 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,826 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.