ArticleScientific reports2017
Comparison of validation and application on various cardiovascular disease mortality risk prediction models in Chinese rural population.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Diagnostic Accuracy of Cardiovascular Disease Prediction Models: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Validation Studies.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Comparison of FINDRISC and the Framingham Model for Predicting CHD Risk: Results from the Kharameh Cohort Study.Vascular health and risk management · 2026Article
- The predictive accuracy of coronary heart disease risk prediction models in rural Northwestern China.Preventive medicine reports · 2023Article
- Evidence supporting the choice of a new cardiovascular risk equation for Australia.The Medical journal of Australia · 2023Review
- Validation of the general Framingham Risk Score (FRS), SCORE2, revised PCE and WHO CVD risk scores in an Asian population.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Prediction of Five-Year Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Derivation in Nanjing, China and External Validation in Scotland, UK.Global heart · 2022Article
- Associations between abdominal obesity and the risk of stroke in Chinese older patients with obstructive sleep apnea: Is there an obesity paradox?Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2022Article
- Risk prediction models for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A systematic assessment with particular reference to Qatar.Qatar medical journal · 2021Article
- Development and validation of prediction models for hypertension risks in rural Chinese populations.Journal of global health · 2019Article
- East meets West: the influence of racial, ethnic and cultural risk factors on cardiac surgical risk model performance.Heart Asia · 2018Article
- Association of Framingham cardiovascular disease risk scores with 10-year risk of cardiovascular mortality: a retrospective cohort study in South India.Indian heart journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research aims to assess application of different cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality risk prediction models in Chinese rural population. Data was collected from a 6-year follow-up survey in rural area of Henan Province, China. 10338 participants aged 40 to 65 years were included. Baseline study was conducted between 2007 and 2008, and followed up from 2013 to 2014. Seven models: general Framingham risk score (general-FRS), simplified-FRS, Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation for high (SCORE-high), SCORE-low, Chinese ischemic CVD (CN-ICVD), Pooled Cohort Risk Equation for white (PCE-white) and for African-American (PCE-AA) were assessed and recalibrated. The model performance was evaluated by C-statistics and modified Nam-D'Agostino test. 168 CVD deaths occurred during follow-up. All seven models showed moderate C-statics ranging from 0.727 to 0.744. Following recalibration, general-FRS, simplified-FRS, CN-ICVD, PCE-white and PCE-AA had improved C-statistics of 0.776, 0.795, 0.793, 0.779, and 0.776 for men and 0.756, 0.753, 0.755, 0.758 and 0.760 for women, respectively. Calibrations χ
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.