ArticleJournal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology2011
Comparison of Framingham, PROCAM, SCORE, and Diamond Forrester to predict coronary atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events.
Article in Journal of nuclear cardiology : official publication of the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
40 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Update of the Brazilian Guideline on Nuclear Cardiology - 2020.Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2020Guideline
- Cardiovascular risk and outcomes in symptomatic patients with suspected coronary artery disease and non coronary vascular disease: A report from the PROMISE trial.American heart journal · 2021Trial
- Heart sparing radiotherapy in breast cancer: the importance of baseline cardiac risks.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2020Trial
- A comparison of Diamond Forrester and coronary calcium scores as gatekeepers for investigations of stable chest pain.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2013Trial
- PCSK9 gene Polymorphism and Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk and Prognosis in Patients With Hyperlipidemia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Article
- Microbiota in Gut-Heart Axis: Metabolites and Mechanisms in Cardiovascular Disease.Comprehensive physiology · 2025Review
- ESC pre-test probability estimates for obstructive coronary artery disease: can they be used in Brazil?European heart journal. Imaging methods and practice · 2024Article
- Using cardiovascular risk indices to predict mortality in Covid-19 patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome: a cross sectional study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- An Assessment of the Effect of Bariatric Surgery on Cardiovascular Disease Risk in the Chinese Population Using Multiple Cardiovascular Risk Models.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2023Article
- Gensini score values for predicting periprocedural myocardial infarction: An observational study analysis.Medicine · 2022Observational
- Correlation between Coronary Artery Calcium- and Different Cardiovascular Risk Score-Based Methods for the Estimation of Vascular Age in Caucasian Patients.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Contemporary Review of Risk Scores in Prediction of Coronary and Cardiovascular Deaths.Current cardiology reports · 2022Review
- Prediction of presence and severity of coronary artery disease using prediction for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk in China scoring system.World journal of clinical cases · 2021Article
- Incremental value of QT interval for the prediction of obstructive coronary artery disease in patients with chest pain.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Impact of Social Determinants of Health, Health Literacy, Self-perceived Risk, and Trust in the Emergency Physician on Compliance with Follow-up.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Sex differences in the relationship between depression and cardiovascular disease risk: a nationwide study in Korea.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2021Article
- Article
- Social Stress-Induced Oxidative DNA Damage Is Related to Prospective Cardiovascular Risk.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- Methotrexate and Adalimumab Decrease the Serum Levels of Cardiovascular Disease Biomarkers (VCAM-1 and E-Selectin) in Plaque Psoriasis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Article
- Estimation of the 10-Year Risk of Cardiovascular Diseases: Using the SCORE, WHO/ISH, and Framingham Models in the Shahrekord Cohort Study in Southwestern Iran.The journal of Tehran Heart Center · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCardiologists are often confronted with patients presenting with chest pain, in whom clinical risk profiling is required. We studied four frequently used risk scores in their ability to predict for coronary artery disease (CAD) and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients presenting with stable chest pain at the cardiology outpatient clinic. METHODS AND
resultsWe enrolled 1,296 stable chest pain patients, who underwent cardiac computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) to assess CAD (any, significant: stenosis ≥50%). Framingham (FRS), PROCAM, SCORE risk score, and Diamond Forrester pre-test probability were calculated. All patients were followed up for a mean 19 ± 9 months for all cardiovascular events (mortality, acute coronary syndrome, revascularization >90 days after CCTA). In ROC-analysis for prediction of significant CAD, the areas under the curve for FRS; 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.64-0.72) and for SCORE; 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.72) were significantly higher than for PROCAM; 0.64 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.68; P ≤ .001), as well as marginally higher than for Diamond Forrester; 0.65 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.68; P ≤ .05). Low FRS category showed the lowest number of patients with significant CAD, compared to patients with low risk using PROCAM, SCORE or Diamond Forrester (P < .001). Also, low FRS category showed less events (compared to PROCAM and SCORE; P < .001, for Diamond Forrester; P = .14).
conclusionOur data show that in a stable chest pain population, the ability of FRS and SCORE to predict for CAD was similar and better compared to PROCAM and Diamond Forrester. The number of low risk patients showing significant CAD or events was lower using FRS. Consequently, risk categorization using FRS seems to be safest to stratify stable chest pain patients prior to CCTA.
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.