ReviewThe Medical journal of Australia2023
Evidence supporting the choice of a new cardiovascular risk equation for Australia.
Review in The Medical journal of Australia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discrimination and calibration performances of non-laboratory-based and laboratory-based cardiovascular risk predictions: a systematic review.Open heart · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Estimating 5-year absolute risk of cardiovascular disease using routinely collected electronic medical records from Australian general practices.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2026Article
- Association of cardiovascular risk scores with coronary plaque and its progression among individuals with family history of coronary artery disease.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular Risk Prediction in Older Adults.Current atherosclerosis reports · 2025Review
- Development and calibration of the 2023 Australian cardiovascular disease risk prediction equations: a model updating study.The Medical journal of Australia · 2025Article
- Risk of cardiovascular disease in Germany: results from GEDA 2022.Journal of health monitoring · 2025Article
- Integrating Social Determinants of Health and Established Risk Factors to Predict Cardiovascular Disease Risk Among Healthy Older Adults.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
- Comparing predictive risk to actual presence of coronary atherosclerosis on coronary computed tomography angiography.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Advances in predicting cardiovascular risk: Applying the PREVENT equations.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2024Article
- Risk estimation for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: considerations for appropriate risk prediction model selection.The Lancet. Global health · 2024Review
- Comparison of Patients Classified as High-Risk between International Cardiovascular Disease Primary Prevention Guidelines.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Assessing, communicating and managing cardiovascular disease risk: a practical summary of the 2023 guideline.Australian prescriber · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
This article reviews the risk equations recommended for use in international cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention guidelines and assesses their suitability for use in Australia against a set of a priori defined selection criteria. The review and assessment were commissioned by the National Heart Foundation of Australia on behalf of the Australian Chronic Disease Prevention Alliance to inform recommendations on CVD risk estimation as part of the 2023 update of the Australian CVD risk assessment and management guidelines. Selected international risk equations were assessed against eight selection criteria: development using contemporary data; inclusion of established cardiovascular risk factors; inclusion of ethnicity and deprivation measures; prediction of a broad selection of fatal and non-fatal CVD outcomes; population representativeness; model performance; external validation in an Australian dataset; and the ability to be recalibrated or modified. Of the ten risk prediction equations reviewed, the New Zealand PREDICT equation met seven of the eight selection criteria, and met additional usability criteria aimed at assessing the ability to apply the risk equation in practice in Australia.
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.