ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2009
Agreement between the SCORE and D'Agostino Scales for the classification of high cardiovascular risk in sedentary spanish patients.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Change of water consumption and its potential influential factors in Shanghai: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate agreement between cardiovascular risk in sedentary patients as estimated by the new Framingham-D'Agostino scale and by the SCORE chart, and to describe the patient characteristics associated with the observed disagreement between the scales.
designA cross-sectional study was undertaken involving a systematic sample of 2,295 sedentary individuals between 40-65 years of age seen for any reason in 56 primary care offices. An estimation was made of the Pearson correlation coefficient and kappa statistic for the classification of high risk subjects (> or =20% according to the Framingham-D'Agostino scale, and > or =5% according to SCORE). Polytomous logistic regression models were fitted to identify the variables associated with the discordance between the two scales.
resultsThe mean risk in males (35%) was 19.5% +/- 13% with D'Agostino scale, and 3.2% +/- 3.3% with SCORE. Among females, they were 8.1% +/- 6.8% and 1.2% +/- 2.2%, respectively. The correlation between the two scales was 0.874 in males (95% CI: 0.857-0.889) and 0.818 in females (95% CI: 0.800-0.834), while the kappa index was 0.50 in males (95% CI: 0.44%-0.56%) and 0.61 in females (95% CI: 0.52%-0.71%). The most frequent disagreement, characterized by high risk according to D'Agostino scale but not according to SCORE, was much more prevalent among males and proved more probable with increasing age and increased LDL-cholesterol, triglyceride and systolic blood pressure values, as well as among those who used antihypertensive drugs and smokers.
conclusionsThe quantitative correlation between the two scales is very high. Patient categorization as corresponding to high risk generates disagreements, mainly among males, where agreement between the two classifications is only moderate.
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.