ArticlePloS one2024
Validation of SCORE2 on a sample from the Russian population and adaptation for the very high cardiovascular disease risk region.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Independent external validation and head-to-head comparison of guideline-recommended CVD risk prediction models.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
- 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
- SCORE2 Outperforms Pol-SCORE in Detecting Increased Cardiovascular Risk.Pathophysiology : the official journal of the International Society for Pathophysiology · 2025Article
- Effects of tiered cardiac rehabilitation on CRP, TNF-α, and physical endurance in older adults with coronary heart disease.Open life sciences · 2025Article
- Correlation and Agreement Between the SCORE2 and PREVENT 10-Year Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Scores: Insights from Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
SCORE2 (Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2) is a risk assessment scale for cardiovascular events, presented in 2021 by the European Society of Cardiology. Both for training and validation of the SCORE2 model, representative samples from the Russian population were not used. Therefore, we aimed to validate SCORE2 on a such sample. For this purpose, we used a sample from the ESSE-RF epidemiological study consisting of 7251 participants aged 40-69 years without history of CVDs. We performed the validation by comparing SCORE2 risk estimates for ESSE-RF participants with the observed incidence of cardiovascular events in the study, adjusted for event information losses. The validation demonstrated that SCORE2 risk estimates were accurate for Russian men and inaccurate for Russian women. Together with the quantitative assessment of risk, SCORE2 offers its interpretation in terms of 10-year CVD risk group: low-moderate, high, and very high. For Russian men we considered the original interpretation of the SCORE2 estimates to be questionable because almost none of the men would be categorized as having "low-to-moderate" 10-year CVD risk. This problem would be typical for all countries of the very high CVD risk region. Therefore, we proposed a new interpretation of the SCORE2 risk estimates for men from the very high risk region. According to the proposed interpretation, the fraction of men in ESSE-RF in "low-to-moderate" 10-year CVD risk increased from 2% to 18% and the fraction of men in "very high" CVD risk decreased from 63% to 20% as compared to the original interpretation. The proposed interpretation would allow a more personalized approach to CVD treatment and optimize the burden on primary healthcare in the very high risk region countries.
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.