ArticleArthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.)2026
Performance of the Predicting Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Events Calculator in Rheumatoid Arthritis.
Article in Arthritis & rheumatology (Hoboken, N.J.), 2026. 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.
- Performance of the PREVENT heart failure risk score and correlation with microvascular dysfunction and coronary plaque burden in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveEvaluate performance of the Predicting Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Events (PREVENT) calculator in rheumatoid arthritis (RA).
methodsPatients with RA were matched up to 10 controls on age, sex, and enrollment year using National Veterans Health Administration, Medicare, and National Death Index data (2006-2020). Ten-year estimated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk was calculated using PREVENT. Calibration (standardized incidence ratio [SIR] and observed/predicted events) and discrimination (sensitivity and Harrel's C-statistics) were compared between RA cases and controls. PREVENT performance was compared with the Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE) for atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) prediction in RA, including net reclassification index (NRI) calculation.
resultsAmong 30,687 patients with RA and 231,752 patients without RA, 28,061 ASCVD and 13,851 heart failure (HF) outcomes were identified over >2 million person-years. PREVENT underestimated overall CVD (SIR 1.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.79-1.88), ASCVD (SIR 2.25, 95% CI 2.19-2.32) and HF risk (SIR 1.41, 95% CI 1.36-1.46) to a greater degree in RA compared with controls and exhibited poor sensitivity for ASCVD (61.9%) and HF (63.2%) development. PREVENT performance was poorer for ASCVD prediction compared with the PCE (SIR 1.38, 95% CI 1.34-1.41, sensitivity 76.0%). NRI for PREVENT was modest (5.3%). Among 657 reclassified patients who experienced ASCVD, 626 were inappropriately reclassified as low or borderline risk. PREVENT performance significantly improved when including hemoglobin A1c (overall CVD: SIR 1.21, 95% CI 1.18-1.24; ASCVD: SIR 1.45, 95% CI 1.41-1.50; HF: SIR 0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.82; sensitivity ASCVD 80.3%).
conclusionPREVENT underestimates CVD risk in RA, consistent with suboptimal performance of existing risk calculators. Preferential use of PREVENT including hemoglobin A1c should be considered. Improving CVD risk stratification in RA remains a high priority.
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.