Counterpoint: The evidence does not support universal screening and treatment in children

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Few pediatric guidelines have generated the amount or intensity of controversy that the pediatric lipid guidelines have. In the following article, I will synthesize the arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment in childhood. Direct evidence that relates the presence of cardiovascular risk factors in childhood to cardiovascular disease outcomes in adulthood is unavailable, and as a consequence, the guidelines were formulated based on a chain of indirect evidence. The debate centers on the strength of the indirect evidence that links risk factors present in childhood to adult disease outcomes. The arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment of children include (1) a history of unanticipated harms caused by screening tests or treatments that were enacted based on indirect evidence, (2) the poor test performance characteristics of lipid profiles in childhood when used as a screening test, (3) problems with the effectiveness of lipid testing done in the office setting, and (4) concerns regarding the safety of statins when used in children.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number783
Pages (from-to)S101-S106
JournalJournal of Clinical Lipidology
Volume9
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2015

Fingerprint

Lipids
Guidelines
Pediatrics
Therapeutics
Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors
Cardiovascular Diseases
Safety

Keywords

  • Cardiovascular risk
  • Children
  • Controversy
  • Guidelines
  • Lipid screening
  • Overdiagnosis
  • Statin

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Internal Medicine
  • Nutrition and Dietetics

Cite this

Counterpoint : The evidence does not support universal screening and treatment in children. / Belamarich, Peter F.

In: Journal of Clinical Lipidology, Vol. 9, No. 5, 783, 01.09.2015, p. S101-S106.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{55fb7d9b19694e67b00ddbd976cb2d4d,
title = "Counterpoint: The evidence does not support universal screening and treatment in children",
abstract = "Few pediatric guidelines have generated the amount or intensity of controversy that the pediatric lipid guidelines have. In the following article, I will synthesize the arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment in childhood. Direct evidence that relates the presence of cardiovascular risk factors in childhood to cardiovascular disease outcomes in adulthood is unavailable, and as a consequence, the guidelines were formulated based on a chain of indirect evidence. The debate centers on the strength of the indirect evidence that links risk factors present in childhood to adult disease outcomes. The arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment of children include (1) a history of unanticipated harms caused by screening tests or treatments that were enacted based on indirect evidence, (2) the poor test performance characteristics of lipid profiles in childhood when used as a screening test, (3) problems with the effectiveness of lipid testing done in the office setting, and (4) concerns regarding the safety of statins when used in children.",
keywords = "Cardiovascular risk, Children, Controversy, Guidelines, Lipid screening, Overdiagnosis, Statin",
author = "Belamarich, {Peter F.}",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacl.2015.07.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "S101--S106",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Lipidology",
issn = "1933-2874",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Counterpoint

T2 - The evidence does not support universal screening and treatment in children

AU - Belamarich, Peter F.

PY - 2015/9/1

Y1 - 2015/9/1

N2 - Few pediatric guidelines have generated the amount or intensity of controversy that the pediatric lipid guidelines have. In the following article, I will synthesize the arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment in childhood. Direct evidence that relates the presence of cardiovascular risk factors in childhood to cardiovascular disease outcomes in adulthood is unavailable, and as a consequence, the guidelines were formulated based on a chain of indirect evidence. The debate centers on the strength of the indirect evidence that links risk factors present in childhood to adult disease outcomes. The arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment of children include (1) a history of unanticipated harms caused by screening tests or treatments that were enacted based on indirect evidence, (2) the poor test performance characteristics of lipid profiles in childhood when used as a screening test, (3) problems with the effectiveness of lipid testing done in the office setting, and (4) concerns regarding the safety of statins when used in children.

AB - Few pediatric guidelines have generated the amount or intensity of controversy that the pediatric lipid guidelines have. In the following article, I will synthesize the arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment in childhood. Direct evidence that relates the presence of cardiovascular risk factors in childhood to cardiovascular disease outcomes in adulthood is unavailable, and as a consequence, the guidelines were formulated based on a chain of indirect evidence. The debate centers on the strength of the indirect evidence that links risk factors present in childhood to adult disease outcomes. The arguments against universal lipid screening and treatment of children include (1) a history of unanticipated harms caused by screening tests or treatments that were enacted based on indirect evidence, (2) the poor test performance characteristics of lipid profiles in childhood when used as a screening test, (3) problems with the effectiveness of lipid testing done in the office setting, and (4) concerns regarding the safety of statins when used in children.

KW - Cardiovascular risk

KW - Children

KW - Controversy

KW - Guidelines

KW - Lipid screening

KW - Overdiagnosis

KW - Statin

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940951053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940951053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacl.2015.07.001

DO - 10.1016/j.jacl.2015.07.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 26343207

AN - SCOPUS:84940951053

VL - 9

SP - S101-S106

JO - Journal of Clinical Lipidology

JF - Journal of Clinical Lipidology

SN - 1933-2874

IS - 5

M1 - 783

ER -