Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28591320›Full record

Observational studyArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2017

Degree of Agreement between Cardiovascular Risk Stratification Tools.

Guilherme Thomé Garcia, Ana Maria Nunes de Faria Stamm, Ariel Córdova Rosa, Antônio Carlos Marasciulo, Rodrigo Conill Marasciulo, Cristian Battistella, Alexandre Augusto de Costa Remor

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Guilherme Thomé GarciaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Ana Maria Nunes de Faria StammUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Ariel Córdova RosaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Antônio Carlos MarasciuloUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Rodrigo Conill MarasciuloUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Cristian BattistellaUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.
Alexandre Augusto de Costa RemorUniversidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, SC - Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

background: Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in Brazil, and primary prevention care may be guided by risk stratification tools. The Framingham (FRS) and QRISK-2 (QRS) risk scores estimate 10-year overall cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic individuals, but the instrument of choice may lead to different therapeutic strategies.

objective: To evaluate the degree of agreement between FRS and QRS in 10-year overall cardiovascular risk stratification in disease-free individuals.

methods: Cross-sectional, observational, descriptive and analytical study in a convenience sample of 74 individuals attending the outpatient care service of a university hospital in Brazil between January 2014 and January 2015. After application of FRS and QRS, patients were classified in low/moderate risk (< 20%) or high risk (≥ 20%).

results: The proportion of individuals classified as at high risk was higher in FRS than in QRS (33.7% vs 21.6%). A synergic effect of male gender with systemic arterial hypertension was observed in both tools, and with for geriatric age group in QRS (p < 0.05) in high-risk stratum. The Kappa index was 0.519 (95%CI = 0.386-0.652; p < 0.001) between both instruments.

conclusion: There was a moderate agreement between FRS and QRS in estimating 10-year overall cardiovascular risk. The risk scores used in this study can identify synergism between variables, and their behavior is influenced by the population in which it was derived. It is important to recognize the need for calibrating risk scores for the Brazilian population. FUNDAMENTO:: A doença cardiovascular (DCV) é a principal causa de morbimortalidade no Brasil, e a prevenção primária pode ser direcionada com ferramentas que estratificam o risco. Os escores de Framingham (ERF) e QRISK-2 (ERQ) estimam o risco cardiovascular (RCV) global em 10 anos em indivíduos assintomáticos, mas a escolha do instrumento pode implicar em terapêuticas distintas. OBJETIVO:: Observar o grau de concordância entre o ERF e o ERQ, na estratificação do risco cardiovascular global em 10 anos, nos indivíduos livres da doença. MÉTODOS:: Estudo transversal, observacional, descritivo e analítico, com uma amostra de conveniência de 74 indivíduos, atendidos em um ambulatório de ensino de um hospital universitário brasileiro, no sul do país, de janeiro de 2014 a janeiro de 2015. O ERF e o ERQ foram aplicados nos pacientes, que foram classificados em baixo/moderado (< 20%) ou alto risco (≥ 20%). RESULTADOS:: A proporção de indivíduos classificados no estrato de alto risco foi superior no ERF que no ERQ (33,7% vs 21,6%), sendo identificado efeito sinérgico do gênero masculino com hipertensão arterial sistêmica nas duas ferramentas, e com faixa etária geriátrica no ERQ (p < 0,05) nesse estrato de risco. O índice de concordância Kappa entre os dois escores foi igual a 0,519 (IC95% = 0,386-0,652; p < 0,001). CONCLUSÃO:: Houve concordância moderada entre o ERF e o ERQ, na estimativa de RCV global em 10 anos. Os escores utilizados podem identificar sinergismo entre as variáveis, e têm comportamento influenciado pela população na qual foram originados. É importante reconhecer a necessidade de escores calibrados para a população brasileira.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsBrazilCardiovascular DiseasesCross-Sectional StudiesDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHospitals, UniversityHumansHypertensionMaleMiddle AgedRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSex Factors

Identifiers

PMID28591320
PMCPMC5444889

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.