IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v120y2016i7p797-808.html

The 2013 cholesterol guideline controversy: Would better evidence prevent pharmaceuticalization?

Author

Listed:
  • Unruh, Lynn
  • Rice, Thomas
  • Rosenau, Pauline Vaillancourt
  • Barnes, Andrew J.

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death globally. A class of medications, known as statins, lowers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, which are associated with CVD. The newest 2013 U.S. cholesterol guideline contains an assessment of risk that greatly expands the number of individuals without CVD for whom statins are recommended. Other countries are also moving in this direction. This article examines the controversy surrounding these guidelines using the 2013 cholesterol guidelines as a case study of broader trends in clinical guidelines to use a narrow evidence base, expand the boundaries of disease and overemphasize pharmaceutical treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • Unruh, Lynn & Rice, Thomas & Rosenau, Pauline Vaillancourt & Barnes, Andrew J., 2016. "The 2013 cholesterol guideline controversy: Would better evidence prevent pharmaceuticalization?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(7), pages 797-808.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:120:y:2016:i:7:p:797-808
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.05.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851016301257
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2016.05.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bell, Susan E. & Figert, Anne E., 2012. "Medicalization and pharmaceuticalization at the intersections: Looking backward, sideways and forward," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 775-783.
    2. Brody, H. & Light, D.W., 2011. "The inverse benefit law: How drug marketing undermines patient safety and public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 101(3), pages 399-404.
    3. Busfield, Joan, 2010. "'A pill for every ill': Explaining the expansion in medicine use," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 934-941, March.
    4. Peter C Gøtzsche & Asbjørn Hróbjartsson & Helle Krogh Johansen & Mette T Haahr & Douglas G Altman & An-Wen Chan, 2007. "Ghost Authorship in Industry-Initiated Randomised Trials," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6, January.
    5. Raymond N Moynihan & Georga P E Cooke & Jenny A Doust & Lisa Bero & Suzanne Hill & Paul P Glasziou, 2013. "Expanding Disease Definitions in Guidelines and Expert Panel Ties to Industry: A Cross-sectional Study of Common Conditions in the United States," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-12, August.
    6. Pollock, Anne & Jones, David S., 2015. "Coronary artery disease and the contours of pharmaceuticalization," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 221-227.
    7. Susan L Norris & Haley K Holmer & Lauren A Ogden & Brittany U Burda, 2011. "Conflict of Interest in Clinical Practice Guideline Development: A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-6, October.
    8. Gerard van den Berg & Gabriele Doblhammer-Reiter & Kaare Christensen, 2011. "Being Born Under Adverse Economic Conditions Leads to a Higher Cardiovascular Mortality Rate Later in Life: Evidence Based on Individuals Born at Different Stages of the Business Cycle," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 48(2), pages 507-530, May.
    9. Sismondo, Sergio, 2008. "How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1909-1914, May.
    10. De Vries, Raymond & Lemmens, Trudo, 2006. "The social and cultural shaping of medical evidence: Case studies from pharmaceutical research and obstetric science," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(11), pages 2694-2706, June.
    11. Susan L Norris & Haley K Holmer & Lauren A Ogden & Brittany U Burda & Rongwei Fu, 2013. "Conflicts of Interest among Authors of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    12. Lexchin, Joel & O'Donovan, Orla, 2010. "Prohibiting or 'managing' conflict of interest? A review of policies and procedures in three European drug regulation agencies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 643-647, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cristina Morciano & Vittorio Basevi & Carla Faralli & Michele Hilton Boon & Sabina Tonon & Domenica Taruscio, 2016. "Policies on Conflicts of Interest in Health Care Guideline Development: A Cross-Sectional Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    2. Padamsee, Tasleem Juana, 2011. "The pharmaceutical corporation and the 'good work' of managing women's bodies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(8), pages 1342-1350, April.
    3. Gabe, Jonathan & Chamberlain, Kerry & Norris, Pauline & Dew, Kevin & Madden, Helen & Hodgetts, Darrin, 2012. "The debate about the funding of Herceptin: A case study of ‘countervailing powers’," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2353-2361.
    4. Sobo, Elisa J., 2017. "Parent use of cannabis for intractable pediatric epilepsy: Everyday empiricism and the boundaries of scientific medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 190-198.
    5. Fisher, Jill A. & Cottingham, Marci D. & Kalbaugh, Corey A., 2015. "Peering into the pharmaceutical “pipeline”: Investigational drugs, clinical trials, and industry priorities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 322-330.
    6. Ozieranski, Piotr & McKee, Martin & King, Lawrence, 2012. "The politics of health technology assessment in Poland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 178-193.
    7. Sismondo, Sergio, 2008. "How pharmaceutical industry funding affects trial outcomes: Causal structures and responses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1909-1914, May.
    8. Nadine Desrochers & Adèle Paul‐Hus & Jen Pecoskie, 2017. "Five decades of gratitude: A meta‐synthesis of acknowledgments research," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(12), pages 2821-2833, December.
    9. Perrotta, Manuela & Geampana, Alina, 2020. "The trouble with IVF and randomised control trials: Professional legitimation narratives on time-lapse imaging and evidence-informed care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    10. S Scott Graham & Zoltan P Majdik & Dave Clark & Molly M Kessler & Tristin Brynn Hooker, 2020. "Relationships among commercial practices and author conflicts of interest in biomedical publishing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-11, July.
    11. Spjeldnæs, Amanda Hylland & Wick, Livia & Fjeld, Heidi E. & Lie, Anne Kveim, 2025. "“We use it a lot for everything”: Antibioticalization and everyday life in a refugee camp in Lebanon," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 366(C).
    12. Gabriele Doblhammer & Gerard J van den Berg & Thomas Fritze, 2013. "Economic Conditions at the Time of Birth and Cognitive Abilities Late in Life: Evidence from Ten European Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-12, September.
    13. Hamid Noghanibehambari & Farzaneh Noghani, 2023. "Long‐run intergenerational health benefits of women empowerment: Evidence from suffrage movements in the US," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(11), pages 2583-2631, November.
    14. van den Berg, Gerard J. & Pinger, Pia R., 2016. "Transgenerational effects of childhood conditions on third generation health and education outcomes," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 103-120.
    15. Petr Praus, 2025. "A note on the topic of single-author articles in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(5), pages 3071-3088, May.
    16. repec:plo:pone00:0110469 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. repec:plo:pone00:0099044 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Dew, Kevin & Norris, Pauline & Gabe, Jonathan & Chamberlain, Kerry & Hodgetts, Darrin, 2015. "Moral discourses and pharmaceuticalised governance in households," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 272-279.
    19. Susan L Norris & Haley K Holmer & Lauren A Ogden & Brittany U Burda & Rongwei Fu, 2013. "Conflicts of Interest among Authors of Clinical Practice Guidelines for Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-1, October.
    20. Başaran, Oyman, 2020. "“The self-making of the scientific circumciser (fenni sünnetçi):” the medicalization of male circumcision in Turkey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    21. Noghanibehambari, Hamid & Engelman, Michal, 2022. "Social insurance programs and later-life mortality: Evidence from new deal relief spending," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    22. Elise M. R. Smith & Stephen Molldrem & Jeffrey S. Farroni & Emma Tumilty, 2024. "Articulating the social responsibilities of translational science," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:120:y:2016:i:7:p:797-808. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.