ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2007
Derivation and validation of QRISK, a new cardiovascular disease risk score for the United Kingdom: prospective open cohort study.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04189497 (Development of a Prognostic Tool for the Stratification of Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With Ischemic Stroke), which is not on this map. Cited by 419 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
Development of a Prognostic Tool for the Stratification of Cardiovascular Risk in Patients With Ischemic Stroke
Who cites it
419 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,036 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Predictive Power of China-PAR Against Cardiovascular Disease.Clinical medicine & research · 2024Pooled it
- Impact of Health and Social Factors on the Cardiometabolic Risk in People with Food Insecurity: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Life events and treatment prognosis for depression: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.Journal of affective disorders · 2022Pooled it
- The contribution of depressive 'disorder characteristics' to determinations of prognosis for adults with depression: an individual patient data meta-analysis.Psychological medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Danish evaluation of Your Heart Forecast: a cluster randomised controlled trial aimed at improving modifiable risk factors of CVD.Open heart · 2026Trial
- Trial
- A Simple Model for Predicting 10-Year Cardiovascular Risk in Middle-Aged to Older Chinese: Guangzhou Biobank Cohort Study.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2022Trial
- Evaluating differences in the clinical impact of a free online weight loss programme, a resource-intensive commercial weight loss programme and an active control condition: a parallel randomised controlled trial.BMC public health · 2019Trial
- Enhanced motivational interviewing for reducing weight and increasing physical activity in adults with high cardiovascular risk: the MOVE IT three-arm RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2019Trial
- Risk prediction rules in individuals at risk of rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review and validation using the APIPPRA cohort.EULAR rheumatology open · 2026Article
- Predicting acute and chronic diabetes complications among adults newly diagnosed with diabetes: development and validation of dynamic risk prediction models.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Prediction of individualised 6-month mortality risk in opioid use disorder.The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science · 2026Article
- Quantifying the Predictive Power of Social Determinants of Health in Cardiovascular Disease and Type 2 Diabetes Progression Using XGBoost: Retrospective Cohort Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Identifying and mitigating bias in multiple aspects of modern clinical research.Communications medicine · 2026Review
- Systematic examination of the PREVENT equations for cardiovascular disease risk.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Multimodal Fusion of Echocardiogram Images and Electronic Medical Records for Heart Disease Screening: Retrospective Algorithm Development and Validation Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2026Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiovascular Disease Prediction Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Validation Studies.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Prevention of dementia using mobile phone applications (PRODEMOS) - a health-economic cost-utility analysis in people aged 55-75 years with low socio-economic status.The journal of prevention of Alzheimer's disease · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular risk prediction in women with gestational diabetes using risk assessment tools: a scoping review.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2026Article
- The significance of the WHO/ISH absolute cardiovascular risk prediction scores among recent stroke survivors in Ghana-Insights from the PINGS2 multicenter study.Equity neuroscience · 2026Article
359 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo derive a new cardiovascular disease risk score (QRISK) for the United Kingdom and to validate its performance against the established Framingham cardiovascular disease algorithm and a newly developed Scottish score (ASSIGN).
designProspective open cohort study using routinely collected data from general practice.
settingUK practices contributing to the QRESEARCH database.
participantsThe derivation cohort consisted of 1.28 million patients, aged 35-74 years, registered at 318 practices between 1 January 1995 and 1 April 2007 and who were free of diabetes and existing cardiovascular disease. The validation cohort consisted of 0.61 million patients from 160 practices.
main outcome measuresFirst recorded diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (incident diagnosis between 1 January 1995 and 1 April 2007): myocardial infarction, coronary heart disease, stroke, and transient ischaemic attacks. Risk factors were age, sex, smoking status, systolic blood pressure, ratio of total serum cholesterol to high density lipoprotein, body mass index, family history of coronary heart disease in first degree relative aged less than 60, area measure of deprivation, and existing treatment with antihypertensive agent.
resultsA cardiovascular disease risk algorithm (QRISK) was developed in the derivation cohort. In the validation cohort the observed 10 year risk of a cardiovascular event was 6.60% (95% confidence interval 6.48% to 6.72%) in women and 9.28% (9.14% to 9.43%) in men. Overall the Framingham algorithm over-predicted cardiovascular disease risk at 10 years by 35%, ASSIGN by 36%, and QRISK by 0.4%. Measures of discrimination tended to be higher for QRISK than for the Framingham algorithm and it was better calibrated to the UK population than either the Framingham or ASSIGN models. Using QRISK 8.5% of patients aged 35-74 are at high risk (20% risk or higher over 10 years) compared with 13% when using the Framingham algorithm and 14% when using ASSIGN. Using QRISK 34% of women and 73% of men aged 64-75 would be at high risk compared with 24% and 86% according to the Framingham algorithm. UK estimates for 2005 based on QRISK give 3.2 million patients aged 35-74 at high risk, with the Framingham algorithm predicting 4.7 million and ASSIGN 5.1 million. Overall, 53 668 patients in the validation dataset (9% of the total) would be reclassified from high to low risk or vice versa using QRISK compared with the Framingham algorithm.
conclusionQRISK performed at least as well as the Framingham model for discrimination and was better calibrated to the UK population than either the Framingham model or ASSIGN. QRISK is likely to provide more appropriate risk estimates to help identify high risk patients on the basis of age, sex, and social deprivation. It is therefore likely to be a more equitable tool to inform management decisions and help ensure treatments are directed towards those most likely to benefit. It includes additional variables which improve risk estimates for patients with a positive family history or those on antihypertensive treatment. However, since the validation was performed in a similar population to the population from which the algorithm was derived, it potentially has a "home advantage." Further validation in other populations is therefore required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.