ArticleThe American journal of cardiology2014
Perceived lifetime risk for cardiovascular disease (from the Dallas Heart Study).
Article in The American journal of cardiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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
20 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inherited risk of coronary artery disease: redefining care with imaging and genetics.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2026Review
- Factors associated with higher cardiovascular disease risk awareness among patients with cardiovascular risk factors in primary care.BMC primary care · 2026Article
- Review
- Assessment of Lifetime Risk for Cardiovascular Disease: Time to Move Forward.Current cardiology reviews · 2024Review
- Associations of Traumatic Injury with Abnormal Glucose Metabolism: A Population-Based Prospective Cohort Study.Clinical epidemiology · 2023Article
- What CVD risk factors predict self-perceived risk of having a myocardial infarction? A cross-sectional study.International journal of cardiology. Cardiovascular risk and prevention · 2022Article
- Low Subjective Cardiovascular Disease Risk Perceptions among Hypertensive Patients in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.Integrated blood pressure control · 2022Article
- Comparative performance of pooled cohort equations and Framingham risk scores in cardiovascular disease risk classification in a slum setting in Nairobi Kenya.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2020Article
- Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Risk in Lithuania-Results from EUROASPIRE V Survey.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2020Observational
- Article
- The relationship between psychological states and health perception in individuals at risk for cardiovascular disease.Psychology research and behavior management · 2019Article
- Perceived Risk of Cardiovascular Disease and Health Behaviors in Black College Students.Journal of best practices in health professions diversity : research, education and policy · 2019Article
- Association between clinical factors and self-underestimation of cardiovascular risk in subjects submitted to a routine health evaluation.Clinical cardiology · 2018Article
- Patient-reported adherence to statin therapy, barriers to adherence, and perceptions of cardiovascular risk.PloS one · 2018Article
- Association between perceived lifetime risk of cardiovascular disease and calculated risk in a male population in Brazil.Vascular health and risk management · 2016Article
- Family history and body mass index predict perceived risks of diabetes and heart attack among community-dwelling Caucasian, Filipino, Korean, and Latino Americans--DiLH Survey.Diabetes research and clinical practice · 2015Article
- Precision Medicine in Lifestyle Medicine: The Way of the Future?American journal of lifestyle medicineReview
- Heart disease risk and self-efficacy in overweight and obese adults.The journal for nurse practitioners : JNPArticle
- Outcomes of a Pilot Intervention Study for Young Adults at Risk for Cardiovascular Disease Based on Their Family History.The Journal of cardiovascular nursingArticle
- Perceived Heart Attack Likelihood in Adults with a High Diabetes Risk.Heart & lung : the journal of critical careArticle
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
Abstract
Lifetime risk estimation for cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been proposed as a useful strategy to improve risk communication in the primary prevention setting. However, the perception of lifetime risk for CVD is unknown. We included 2,998 subjects from the Dallas Heart Study. Lifetime risk for developing CVD was classified as high (≥39%) versus low (<39%) according to risk factor burden as described in our previously published algorithm. Perception of lifetime risk for myocardial infarction was assessed by way of a 5-point scale. Baseline characteristics were compared across levels of perceived lifetime risk. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the association of participant characteristics with level of perceived lifetime risk for CVD and with correctness of perceptions. Of the 2,998 participants, 64.8% (n = 1,942) were classified as having high predicted lifetime risk for CVD. There was significant discordance between perceived and predicted lifetime risk. After multivariable adjustment, family history of premature myocardial infarction, high self-reported stress, and low perceived health were all strongly associated with high perceived lifetime risk (odds ratio [OR] 2.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72 to 3.27; OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.66 to 2.83; and OR 2.71, 95% CI 2.09 to 3.53; respectively). However, the association between traditional CVD risk factors and high perceived lifetime risk was more modest. In conclusion, misperception of lifetime risk for CVD is common and frequently reflects the influence of factors other than traditional risk factor levels. These findings highlight the importance of effectively communicating the significance of traditional risk factors in determining the lifetime risk for CVD.
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.