Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29409444›Full record

ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2018

Should heart age calculators be used alongside absolute cardiovascular disease risk assessment?

Carissa Bonner, Katy Bell, Jesse Jansen, Paul Glasziou, Les Irwig, Jenny Doust, Kirsten McCaffery

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
20.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Biological age calculators to motivate lifestyle change: Environmental scan of online tools and evaluation of behaviour change techniques.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Carissa BonnerWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia. carissa.bonner@sydney.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-4797-6460
Katy BellWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Jesse JansenWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Paul GlasziouWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Les IrwigWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Jenny DoustWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
Kirsten McCafferyWiser Healthcare Program, Sydney School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, 2006, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUBond University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNational estimates of 'heart age' by government health organisations in the US, UK and China show most people have an older heart age than current age. While most heart age calculators are promoted as a communication tool for lifestyle change, they may also be used to justify medication when clinical guidelines advocate their use alongside absolute risk assessment. However, only those at high absolute risk of a heart attack or stroke are likely to benefit from medication, and it is not always clear how heart age relates to absolute risk. This article aims to: 1) explain how heart age calculation methods relate to absolute risk guidelines; 2) summarise research investigating whether heart age improves risk communication; and 3) discuss implications for the use of medication and shared decision making in clinical practice. MAIN BODY: There is a large and growing number of heart age models and online calculators, but the clinical meaning of an older heart age result is highly variable. An older heart age result may indicate low, moderate or high absolute risk of a heart attack or stroke in the next 5-10 years, and the same individual may receive a younger or older heart age result depending on which calculator is used. Heart age may help doctors convey the need to change lifestyle, but it cannot help patients make an informed choice about medication to reduce CVD risk.

conclusionInteractive heart age tools may be helpful as a communication tool to initiate lifestyle change to reduce risk factors. However, absolute risk should be used instead of heart age to enable informed decision making about medication, to avoid unnecessary treatment of low risk people. Evidence-based decision aids that improve patient understanding of absolute risk should be considered as alternatives to heart age calculators for lifestyle and medication decisions.

Indexed as

Evidence-Based MedicineAge FactorsCardiovascular AgentsCardiovascular DiseasesClinical Decision-MakingDecision Support TechniquesHumansLife StylePredictive Value of TestsPrognosisRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsRisk Reduction BehaviorTime FactorsUnnecessary ProceduresCardiovascular AgentsCardiovascular riskHeart ageOverdiagnosisOvertreatmentRisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID29409444
PMCPMC5801811
OpenAlexW2796354332

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.