ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Reevaluating the Use of Race/Ethnicity in the MESA Risk Score.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCardiovascular disease risk scores are widespread in research and clinical settings. The MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) risk score estimates the 10-year risk of coronary heart disease and was novel in its use of coronary artery calcium alongside traditional risk factors, including race/ethnicity. However, including race/ethnicity in a risk score model requires careful consideration. We developed a race-free MESA risk score and compared it with the original.
methodsWe used data from the MESA cohort, a community-based cohort of individuals aged 45 to 84 years who identified as White, Hispanic/Latino, Black, or Chinese and were free of prevalent cardiovascular disease upon study entry, to develop a race-free risk score estimating 10-year coronary heart disease risk. We used the same 2-step regularization procedure as that for the original MESA risk score: (1) least absolute shrinkage and selection operator for variable selection, and (2) ridge regression to prevent overfitting. Neither race/ethnicity nor any interaction term with race/ethnicity was included as a candidate predictor.
resultsWhen excluding race/ethnicity, several interaction terms were retained that were not retained in the original MESA risk score. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the race-free risk score was 0.820 (95% CI, 0.801-0.840), and the difference in area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was not significant (estimate, 0.0032 [95% CI, -0.0008 to 0.0073]). The discrimination slope in the race-free model was 0.101, while that of the original MESA risk score was 0.0937.
conclusionsWe developed a race-free MESA risk score that performs comparably to the MESA risk score in both calibration and discrimination.
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.