ArticleCureus2025
A Retrospective Audit of Statin Prescription Practices in Diabetic Patients With Cardiovascular Risk.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Real-World Evidence on Statin Use for Traumatic Brain Injury Associated Degenerative Neurological Disorders.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Diabetic patients are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), and clinical guidelines recommend statin therapy for most individuals with diabetes aged ≥40 years or those with established atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD). Objective The main objective of this audit was to evaluate the adherence to guideline-based statin prescribing practices among diabetic patients with cardiovascular risk and to identify gaps in prescription intensity and eligibility. Materials and methods A retrospective clinical audit was conducted on 131 diabetic patients at a tertiary care center. Data were collected retrospectively through a structured audit tool using patient medical records, including demographics (age, sex), duration of diabetes, comorbidities, lipid profile reports, cardiovascular history, and current statin prescription status (type, dose, and intensity). Results Out of 131 diabetic patients, 109 (83.2%) were eligible for statin therapy. Among them, 84 (77.1%) received any statin, while 25 (22.9%) remained untreated despite eligibility. High-intensity statins were prescribed in only 28 (33.3%) cases. Among patients with ASCVD (n = 34), 85.3% were on statins, but only 55.9% received high-intensity therapy. In patients without ASCVD but with risk factors (n = 75), 73.3% received statins, mostly moderate-intensity. Statin use was significantly higher in males (83.8%) than in females (69.2%) (p = 0.041), and patients aged ≥50 were more likely to receive statins (p = 0.018). Conclusions This audit reveals underutilization and suboptimal dosing of statins in diabetic patients, especially among women and younger individuals. Strengthening clinical adherence through guideline dissemination, audit-feedback cycles, and electronic decision support systems may improve cardiovascular outcomes in this high-risk group.
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.