ArticleAtherosclerosis plus2026
Statin treatment in routine clinical practice: Insights from the STATRIP physician survey.
Article in Atherosclerosis plus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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: Statins remain to date the primary therapeutic option for dyslipidemia. However, a significant portion of patients with dyslipidemia fail to achieve optimal low-density lipoprotein targets for reasons often related to treating physicians. The aim of STAtin Treatment in Routine clinical Practice (STATRIP) survey was to report and quantify perceptions and common beliefs regarding treatment with statins, among physicians implicated in the primary and secondary care of patients with dyslipidemia. Methods and results: This observational cross-sectional study was conducted using an online-distributed questionnaire, which was designed to cover a wide range of physicians' knowledge and perceptions on treatment with statins. A total of 261 health care providers filled out the survey, mostly general practitioners and internists (93.5 %). Study participants clearly expressed their concerns regarding statin-related side effects, including fears on interactions with other medication, muscle aches and pain, increase in liver enzymes, and gastrointestinal disorders. Myalgias were observed by physicians in as many as 29.2 % of patients receiving rosuvastatin, and in as many as 26.5 % receiving atorvastatin. Combination lipid-lowering therapy with ezetimibe was reported by only 53.6 % of participants as a prevalent strategy for uncontrolled individuals. Only 58.6 % apply non-HDL cholesterol measurements in their clinical practice. Conclusions: Our study provides a clear perspective of treating physicians regarding statin prescription patterns. Several misconceptions, especially regarding statin-related adverse effects, hold well among treating physicians. Insufficient implementation of dyslipidemia guidelines calls for more targeted educational interventions to achieve optimal management of patients with dyslipidemia.
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.