ArticleAnnals of family medicine
Original and REGICOR Framingham functions in a nondiabetic population of a Spanish health care center: a validation study.
Article in Annals of family medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Research inefficiencies in external validation studies of the Framingham Wilson coronary heart disease risk rule: A systematic review.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Performance of the Framingham risk models and pooled cohort equations for predicting 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Effects of a Novel Nutraceutical Combination (Aquilea ColesterolNutrients · 2019Trial
- Circulating Undercarboxylated Osteocalcin as Estimator of Cardiovascular and Type 2 Diabetes Risk in Metabolic Syndrome Patients.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- A framework for meta-analysis of prediction model studies with binary and time-to-event outcomes.Statistical methods in medical research · 2019Article
- In this issue: from apprehension to action.Annals of family medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRisk functions can help general practitioners identify patients at high cardiovascular risk, but overprediction inevitably leads to a disproportionate number of patients being targeted for treatment. To assess predicted cardiovascular risk, we analyzed the 10-year performance of the original and REGICOR Framingham coronary risk functions in nondiabetic patients.
methodsOurs was a longitudinal, observational study of a retrospective cohort of patients observed for 10 years in primary care practices in Badajoz, Spain. Our cohort comprised 447 nondiabetic patients aged 35 to 74 years who had no evidence of cardiovascular disease and were not on lipid-lowering or antihypertensive therapy. We assessed the patients' 10-year coronary risk measurement from the time of their recruitment. We also estimated the percentage of patients who were candidates for antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy.
resultsThe actual incidence rate of coronary events was 6.7%. The original Framingham equation overpredicted risk by 73%, whereas the REGICOR Framingham function underpredicted risk by 64%. The Brier scores were 0.06364 and 0.06093 (P = .365) for the original Framingham and REGICOR Framingham functions, respectively, and the remaining discrimination and calibration parameters were also highly similar for both functions. The original Framingham function classified 14.8% of the population as high risk and the REGICOR Framingham function classified 6.9%. The proportions of patients who, according to the original Framingham and REGICOR functions, would be candidates for lipid-lowering therapy were 14.3% and 6.7%, and for antihypertensive therapy they were 12.5% and 7.8%, respectively.
conclusionThe original Framingham equation overestimated coronary risk whereas the REGICOR Framingham function underestimated it. The original Framingham function selected a greater percentage of candidates for antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy.
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.