ArticleEuropean journal of preventive cardiology2024
Validation of Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons in the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population cohort.
Article in European journal of preventive cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 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
29 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Early Value Assessment of Biomarker-Guided Precision Medicine for Treatment-Resistant Hypertension: A Headroom and Threshold Analysis.Applied health economics and health policy · 2026Article
- Independent external validation and head-to-head comparison of guideline-recommended CVD risk prediction models.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- Sex disparities in LDL-C target achievement among older adults receiving statin therapy.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2026Article
- Beyond SCORE2: Rethinking Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in a Very-High-Risk European Setting-A Narrative Review and Proposal of the ROMA-CV Algorithm for Romania.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Cardiovascular Risk Score (SCORE2) Predicts The Incidence and Severity of Cardiac Damage After Polytrauma: How to Identify At-Risk Patients?Shock (Augusta, Ga.) · 2026Article
- Article
- The Role of Cardiovascular Risk Prediction Model Selection in Primary Prevention: An Observational Study of Statin Eligibility Agreement Across Nine Scores in a Lithuanian Primary-Prevention Cohort.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Observational
- Risk prediction for individual patients and the pitfalls of selecting an optimal prediction model: do not judge a model by its c-statistic.European journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular Events in US Adults Aged ≥80 Years: Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Article
- Mapping and evaluation of global and country-specific cardiovascular disease risk prediction models.Future cardiology · 2026Review
- Prediction of cardiovascular disease risk in women and individuals with polycystic ovary syndrome using the American Heart Association PREVENT model: A long-term population-based cohort study.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- SCORE2-Older Persons (SCORE2-OP): Validation and Added Value of Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in a French Cohort.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2025Article
- Real-world application of deep learning for ECG-based prediction of coronary artery disease and revascularization needs.European heart journal. Digital health · 2025Article
- Sex-Specific Differences in Subclinical Organ Damage and Cardiovascular Risk Stratification Among Patients Classified by the Presence of Coronary Artery Disease and Hypertension.High blood pressure & cardiovascular prevention : the official journal of the Italian Society of Hypertension · 2025Article
- Navigating fairness aspects of clinical prediction models.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- The polyunsaturated-to-monounsaturated fatty acid ratio and cardiovascular risk prediction: a prospective cohort study of 183,237 adults.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Article
- Personalized Treatment of Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: The Value and Limitations of Predictive Models.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2025Review
- External validation and comparison of six cardiovascular risk prediction models in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE)-Colombia study.European journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Evaluating Cardiovascular Risk Factors Among Healthcare Professionals in Iran.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025Article
- Clinically Accessible Liver Fibrosis Association with CT Scan Coronary Artery Disease Beyond Other Validated Risk Predictors: The ICAP Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
aimsThe European Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons (OP) models are recommended to identify individuals at high 10-year risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Independent validation and assessment of clinical utility is needed. This study aims to assess discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of low-risk SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP. METHODS AND
resultsValidation in individuals aged 40-69 years (SCORE2) and 70-79 years (SCORE2-OP) without baseline CVD or diabetes from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC) Norfolk prospective population study. We compared 10-year CVD risk estimates with observed outcomes (cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke). For SCORE2, 19 560 individuals (57% women) had 10-year CVD risk estimates of 3.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-3.7] vs. observed 3.8% (95% CI 3.6-4.1) [observed (O)/expected (E) ratio 1.0 (95% CI 1.0-1.1)]. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.74-0.77), with underestimation of risk in men [O/E 1.4 (95% CI 1.3-1.6)] and overestimation in women [O/E 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8)]. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed clinical benefit. Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2-Older Persons in 3113 individuals (58% women) predicted 10-year CVD events in 10.2% (95% CI 10.1-10.3) vs. observed 15.3% (95% CI 14.0-16.5) [O/E ratio 1.6 (95% CI 1.5-1.7)]. The AUC was 0.63 (95% CI 0.60-0.65) with underestimation of risk across sex and risk ranges. Decision curve analysis showed limited clinical benefit.
conclusionIn a UK population cohort, the SCORE2 low-risk model showed fair discrimination and calibration, with clinical benefit for preventive treatment initiation decisions. In contrast, in individuals aged 70-79 years, SCORE2-OP demonstrated poor discrimination, underestimated risk in both sexes, and limited clinical utility.
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.