Observational studyPloS one2024
Ten-year trends in lipid management among patients after myocardial infarction in South Korea.
Observational study in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term trends of lipid concentrations and lipid control in South Korea, 2007 to 2023: A nationwide representative study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world evidence on the additional cancer risk reduction of ezetimibe: a 10-year nationwide retrospective cohort study emulating a target trial.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Twenty-Year Clinical Experience of the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry.Korean circulation journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDyslipidemia is an important risk factor for acute myocardial infarction. However, real-world data on its prevalence and lipid management trends for Korean patients with acute myocardial infarction are limited. This study aimed to determine the 10-year temporal trends in dyslipidemia prevalence and lipid management in this patient population. METHODS AND
findingsThe study used a merged database of two nationwide observational cohorts (2011-2020) that included 26,751 participants. The primary endpoints were the achievement rates of the (1) absolute low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target of <70 mg/dL (<1.8 mmol/L), (2) relative LDL-C target reduction of >50% from the baseline, (3) absolute or relative LDL-C target (American target), and (4) both absolute and relative LDL-C targets (European target). The dyslipidemia prevalence increased from 11.1% to 17.1%, whereas the statin prescription rate increased from 92.9% to 97.0% from 2011 to 2020. The rate of high-intensity statin use increased from 12.80% in 2012 to 69.30% in 2020. The rate of ezetimibe use increased from 4.50% in 2016 to 22.50% in 2020. The high-intensity statin and ezetimibe prescription rates (0.20% to 9.30% from 2016 to 2020) increased gradually. The absolute and relative LDL-C target achievement rates increased from 41.4% and 20.8% in 2012 to 62.5% and 39.5% in 2019, respectively. The American (45.7% in 2012 to 68.6% in 2019) and European (16.5% in 2012 to 33.8% in 2019) target achievement rates also increased.
conclusionsThe adoption of lipid management guidelines in clinical practice has improved. However, continued efforts are needed to reduce the risk of recurrent ischemic events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.