ArticleIndian heart journal
A cross-sectional validation study comparing the accuracy of different risk scores in assessing the risk of acute coronary syndrome among patients in a tertiary care hospital in Kerala.
Article in Indian heart journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- An exploratory analysis of the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular disease risk calculations in veterans with spinal cord injury and disorders.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2025Article
- To Evaluate Efficiency of Various Coronary Artery Disease Risk Scores With Traditional Risk Factors in Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography.Journal of the Saudi Heart Association · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere are many cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk score calculators in practice, which are not based on Indian population data.
objectivesTo identify the best CVD risk score calculator applicable in the Indian population. MATERIALS AND
methodsA total of 1000 patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included in the study and their CVD risk score, had they presented before the event, was calculated. The Framingham risk score (FRS-body mass index [BMI], FRS-fasting lipid profile [FLP]), the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association pooled cohort equation risk calculator (ACC/AHA PCE), Joint British Society risk calculator 3 (JBS3) and the World Health Organization (WHO) risk prediction charts (WHO TC and WHO without TC [WHO NO TC]) were used.
resultsIt was seen that among the 1000 people included in the study, the FRS-BMI (59.2%), FRS-FLP (61.5%), ACC/AHA (70.1%) and the JBS3 (62.5%) identified a majority as having a risk of ≥20%, whereas both the WHO TC (65.3%) and the WHO NO TC (64.5%) identified a majority of the ACS patients as having a risk of <20%. The sensitivity was highest for the ACC/AHA (87.8%), FRS-FLP (85.1%) and then JBS3 (80.1%), whereas the specificity was highest for the WHO TC (83.6%) and the WHO NO TC (82.1%). When looking at the accuracy, the FRS-FLP was the most accurate with 80.1%, whereas the ACC/AHA and the JBS3 followed at 74.7% and 73.1%, respectively.
conclusionThe ACC/AHA seems to be an acceptable risk prediction system to be used in the Indian population and is also relatively easy and cheap to use.
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.