ArticlePloS one2022
Actionable absolute risk prediction of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease based on the UK Biobank.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning based prediction models for cardiovascular disease risk using electronic health records data: systematic review and meta-analysis.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Review
- PFAS and their association with the increased risk of cardiovascular disease in postmenopausal women.Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology · 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the primary cause of all death globally. Timely and accurate identification of people at risk of developing an atherosclerotic CVD and its sequelae is a central pillar of preventive cardiology. One widely used approach is risk prediction models; however, currently available models consider only a limited set of risk factors and outcomes, yield no actionable advice to individuals based on their holistic medical state and lifestyle, are often not interpretable, were built with small cohort sizes or are based on lifestyle data from the 1960s, e.g. the Framingham model. The risk of developing atherosclerotic CVDs is heavily lifestyle dependent, potentially making many occurrences preventable. Providing actionable and accurate risk prediction tools to the public could assist in atherosclerotic CVD prevention. Accordingly, we developed a benchmarking pipeline to find the best set of data preprocessing and algorithms to predict absolute 10-year atherosclerotic CVD risk. Based on the data of 464,547 UK Biobank participants without atherosclerotic CVD at baseline, we used a comprehensive set of 203 consolidated risk factors associated with atherosclerosis and its sequelae (e.g. heart failure). Our two best performing absolute atherosclerotic risk prediction models provided higher performance, (AUROC: 0.7573, 95% CI: 0.755-0.7595) and (AUROC: 0.7544, 95% CI: 0.7522-0.7567), than Framingham (AUROC: 0.680, 95% CI: 0.6775-0.6824) and QRisk3 (AUROC: 0.725, 95% CI: 0.7226-0.7273). Using a subset of 25 risk factors identified with feature selection, our reduced model achieves similar performance (AUROC 0.7415, 95% CI: 0.7392-0.7438) while being less complex. Further, it is interpretable, actionable and highly generalizable. The model could be incorporated into clinical practice and might allow continuous personalized predictions with automated intervention suggestions.
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.