ArticleBMC medical informatics and decision making2025
Performance of CAC-prob in predicting coronary artery calcium score: an external validation study in a high-CAC burden population.
Article in BMC medical informatics and decision making, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Nomogram for Predicting Coronary Artery Calcification Using Achilles Tendon Cross-Sectional Area, Mechanical Parameters, and TCBI.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough CAC screening is gaining recognition in developing countries such as Thailand, official guidelines for using the CAC score in cardiovascular risk assessment remain lacking. This study aims to externally validate CAC-prob, a recently developed prediction model that can estimate the probability of CAC > 0 and CAC ≥ 100, to confirm its robustness.
methodThis study externally validated the CAC-prob model using retrospective data from a tertiary care centre in northern Thailand. Patients who underwent CAC screening between 2019 and 2022 were included. CAC-prob consists of two models: one predicting the probability of CAC > 0 (Model 1) and another predicting the probability of CAC ≥ 100 (Model 2). Model performance was assessed in terms of discrimination (Ordinal C-index), calibration slope, and diagnostic indices for each model.
resultsA total of 329 patients were included. The patient characteristics observed in this study indicated a higher prevalence of DM, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, CKD, and CAC ≥ 100 compared to the development study. The ordinal C-index derived from the validation study showed a slight decline (0.78). The calibration slope for Model 1 and Model 2 was 1.28 (95% CI 0.95-1.63) and 1.06 (95% CI 0.78-1.36), respectively. In Model 1, CAC-prob demonstrated comparable diagnostic performance. However, in Model 2, it showed slightly better performance, with significantly improved sensitivity compared to the development study.
conclusionThis external validation study confirms the predictive performance of CAC-prob in Northern Thai patients. The findings support the integration of CAC-prob into routine clinical practice to aid physicians in making recommendations for CAC screening.
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.