Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36135440›Full record

ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2022

Prognostic Modelling Studies of Coronary Heart Disease-A Systematic Review of Conventional and Genetic Risk Factor Studies.

Nayla Nasr, Beáta Soltész, János Sándor, Róza Adány, Szilvia Fiatal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2022. 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

5 authors.

Nayla NasrDoctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0001-9512-3094
Beáta SoltészFaculty of Public Health, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.
János SándorDepartment of Public Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.
Róza AdányDoctoral School of Health Sciences, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0002-9679-6669
Szilvia FiatalDepartment of Public Health and Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, 4032 Debrecen, Hungary.

Funding

European Union under the European Regional Development Fund GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00005Hungarian Academy of Sciences TK2016-78
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aims to provide an overview of multivariable prognostic modelling studies developed for coronary heart disease (CHD) in the general population and to explore the optimal prognostic model by comparing the models' performance. A systematic review was performed using Embase, PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus databases until 30 November 2019. In this work, only prognostic studies describing conventional risk factors alone or a combination of conventional and genomic risk factors, being developmental and/or validation prognostic studies of a multivariable model, were included. A total of 4021 records were screened by titles and abstracts, and 72 articles were eligible. All the relevant studies were checked by comparing the discrimination, reclassification, and calibration measures. Most of the models were developed in the United States and Canada and targeted the general population. The models included a set of similar predictors, such as age, sex, smoking, cholesterol level, blood pressure, BMI, and diabetes mellitus. In this study, many articles were identified and screened for consistency and reliability using CHARM and GRIPS statements. However, the usefulness of most prognostic models was not demonstrated; only a limited number of these models supported clinical evidence. Unfortunately, substantial heterogeneity was recognized in the definition and outcome of CHD events. The inclusion of genetic risk scores in addition to conventional risk factors might help in predicting the incidence of CHDs; however, the generalizability of the existing prognostic models remains open. Validation studies for the existing developmental models are needed to ensure generalizability, improve the research quality, and increase the transparency of the study.

Indexed as

conventional risk factorscoronary heart diseasegenetic risk factorsprognostic modelssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36135440
PMCPMC9505820

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.