You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 265 No. 22, June 12, 1991 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Commentary
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (27)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

The Case Against 'the Case Against Childhood Cholesterol Screening'

Ken Resnicow, PhD; Gerald Berenson, MD; Steven Shea, MD; Sathanur Srinivasan, PhD; William Strong, MD; E. L. Wynder, MD

JAMA. 1991;265(22):3003-3005.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

IN A RECENT edition of THE JOURNAL, two related articles questioned the efficacy and safety of screening and treating children for hypercholesterolemia. The chief conclusion drawn by Lauer and Clarke,1 and a cornerstone of the thesis presented by Newman et al,2 was that "many children with high cholesterol levels do not become adults with high cholesterol levels." This message, which was widely promulgated in the lay and scientific media, has significant public health implications. However, both articles contain flaws in methods and reasoning that threaten the validity of the conclusions drawn. This Commentary addresses these limitations, beginning with the study of Lauer and Clarke.

Methods Used to Calculate Sensitivity and Positive Predictive Value

Based on the data presented by Lauer and Clarke, the National Cholesterol Education Program's cut point of 5.17 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) was approximately the 80th percentile in their adult population. Therefore, the maximum sensitivity of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]


Author Affiliations

From the American Health Foundation, New York, NY (Drs Resnicow and Wynder); Section of Cardiology (Dr Berenson) and Departments of Medicine and Biochemistry (Dr Srinivasan), Louisiana State University and Medical Center, New Orleans; Children's Cardiovascular Health Center and Department of Medicine, Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center, New York, NY (Dr Shea); and the Section of Pediatric Cardiology, The Medical College of Georgia, Augusta (Dr Strong).


Footnotes

Reprint requests to Division of Health Promotion Research, American Health Foundation, 320 E 43rd St, New York, NY 10017 (Dr Resnicow).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1991 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.