-
- Gary S Collins and Douglas G Altman.
- Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Wolfson College Annexe, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6UD, UK. gary.collins@csm.ox.ac.uk
- BMJ. 2012 Jan 1;344:e4181.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the performance of the QRISK2-2011 score for predicting the 10 year risk of cardiovascular disease in an independent UK cohort of patients from general practice and to compare it with earlier versions of the model and a National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence version of the Framingham equation.DesignProspective cohort study to validate a cardiovascular risk score with routinely collected data between June 1994 and June 2008.Setting364 practices from the United Kingdom contributing to The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database.ParticipantsTwo million patients aged 30 to 84 years (11.8 million person years) with 93,564 cardiovascular events.Main Outcome MeasureFirst diagnosis of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, angina, coronary heart disease, stroke, and transient ischaemic attack) recorded in general practice records.ResultsResults from this independent and external validation of QRISK2-2011 indicate good performance data when compared with the NICE version of the Framingham equation. QRISK2-2011 had better ability to identify those at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease than did the NICE Framingham equation. QRISK2-2011 is well calibrated, with reasonable agreement between observed and predicted outcomes, whereas the NICE Framingham equation seems to consistently over-predict risk in men by about 5% and shows poor calibration in women.ConclusionsQRISK2-2011 seems to be a useful model, with good discriminative and calibration properties when compared with the NICE version of the Framingham equation. Furthermore, based on current high risk thresholds, concerns exist on the clinical usefulness of the NICE version of the Framingham equation for identifying women at high risk of developing cardiovascular disease. At current thresholds the NICE version of the Framingham equation has no clinical benefit in either men or women.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.