Cited by 3Cardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

Statin Therapy Persistence Following Opportunistic Screening for Coronary Artery Calcium on Nongated Chest CTs

Open access
Bouladian, Sarkis G., Ngo, Summer, Mastrodicasa, Domenico, Eng, David, Khandwala, Nishith, Sousa, Doug, Chaudhari, Akshay S., Maron, David J. +2 more·2025·JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcmg.2025.03.007

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Patient and clinician notifications based on AI-CAC results improved statin prescription and downstream lipid testing, statin persistence, LDL-C reduction and CAD evaluation.

    “Patient and clinician notifications based on AI-CAC results improved statin prescription and downstream lipid testing, statin persistence, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction and CAD evaluation.41–43”

    From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [43]

    The NOTIFY-EXTEND text (page unavailable) reports higher statin initiation with notification in NOTIFY-1, high statin persistence among those who started therapy, lower LDL-C among patients retested, and more CAC scans and stress tests after notification. It says 97 patients underwent repeat lipid testing, but does not show that notification increased lipid testing or improved statin persistence relative to a comparison group. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Notification of patients and clinicians based on AI-CAC results increases cardiovascular preventive discussions, statin prescription rates and statin persistence.

    “Notification of patients and clinicians based on these results has been shown to increase cardiovascular preventive discussions, statin prescription rates and statin persistence.40–43”

    From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [43]

    The NOTIFY-EXTEND introduction reports that statin initiation was 51% after notification versus 7% with usual care, supporting an increase in statin prescribing. Its results report documented statin discussions and high persistence at 18 months, but do not establish that notification increased preventive discussions or statin persistence relative to a comparator. No page numbers are provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Three included studies employed an AI algorithm (Bunkerhill Health) in which co-investigator CPL holds equity interest.

    “Three included studies41–43 employed an AI algorithm (Bunkerhill Health) in which co-investigator CPL holds equity interest.”

    From Prognostication and clinical opportunities with AI for coronary artery calcium: a scoping review (2026) · cites this paper as [43]

    The NOTIFY-EXTEND paper states that patients in the underlying NOTIFY-1 project were identified using a deep learning algorithm, supporting the claim that this included study employed AI. Our copy does not identify the algorithm as Bunkerhill Health’s. The statement about CPL’s equity interest concerns the citing authors’ disclosure, not a finding attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bouladian, S. G., Ngo, S., Mastrodicasa, D., Eng, D., Khandwala, N., Sousa, D., Chaudhari, A. S., Maron, D. J., Rodriguez, F., & Sandhu, A. T.
Affiliations
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Sandhu, Alexander T.
Venue
JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-07
Volume
18
Issue
7
Pages
841-843
ISSN
  • 1876-7591 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-878X
OpenAlex
W4410357664
Cited by
3
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3
FWCI
1.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JACC. Cardiovascular imaging (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Stanford University
  • National Institute of Health
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Keywords
statin therapy, treatment persistence, coronary artery calcium, opportunistic screening, cardiovascular risk, secondary prevention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review