Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24373202›Full record

ReviewBMC cardiovascular disorders2013

Evaluation of the performance of existing non-laboratory based cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms.

Jacob K Kariuki, Eileen M Stuart-Shor, Suzanne G Leveille, Laura L Hayman

Registry-linked trialAbstract readEvaluation StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03512691 (The Nueva Ecija Cardiovascular Risk Experiment), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT03512691 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

The Nueva Ecija Cardiovascular Risk Experiment: An Evaluation of the Impact of Risk Information and Screening on Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease

TypeinterventionalSponsorUPecon Foundation, Inc.Ran2018 to 2021Enrolled5,019ConditionsCardiovascular Diseases, Cardiovascular Risk FactorArmsInformation on CVD Risk, Lottery Incentive
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jacob K KariukiCollege of Nursing and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA. Jacob.Kariuki@umb.edu.
Eileen M Stuart-Shor
Suzanne G Leveille
Laura L Hayman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe high burden and rising incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in resource constrained countries necessitates implementation of robust and pragmatic primary and secondary prevention strategies. Many current CVD management guidelines recommend absolute cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment as a clinically sound guide to preventive and treatment strategies. Development of non-laboratory based cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms enable absolute risk assessment in resource constrained countries.The objective of this review is to evaluate the performance of existing non-laboratory based CV risk assessment algorithms using the benchmarks for clinically useful CV risk assessment algorithms outlined by Cooney and colleagues.

methodsA literature search to identify non-laboratory based risk prediction algorithms was performed in MEDLINE, CINAHL, Ovid Premier Nursing Journals Plus, and PubMed databases. The identified algorithms were evaluated using the benchmarks for clinically useful cardiovascular risk assessment algorithms outlined by Cooney and colleagues.

resultsFive non-laboratory based CV risk assessment algorithms were identified. The Gaziano and Framingham algorithms met the criteria for appropriateness of statistical methods used to derive the algorithms and endpoints. The Swedish Consultation, Framingham and Gaziano algorithms demonstrated good discrimination in derivation datasets. Only the Gaziano algorithm was externally validated where it had optimal discrimination. The Gaziano and WHO algorithms had chart formats which made them simple and user friendly for clinical application.

conclusionBoth the Gaziano and Framingham non-laboratory based algorithms met most of the criteria outlined by Cooney and colleagues. External validation of the algorithms in diverse samples is needed to ascertain their performance and applicability to different populations and to enhance clinicians' confidence in them.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsCardiovascular DiseasesHumansReproducibility of ResultsRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID24373202
PMCPMC3890583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.