Literature DB >> 14687264

Framingham-based tools to calculate the global risk of coronary heart disease: a systematic review of tools for clinicians.

Stacey Sheridan1, Michael Pignone, Cynthia Mulrow.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine the features of available Framingham-based risk calculation tools and review their accuracy and feasibility in clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: medline, 1966-April 2003, and the google search engine on the Internet. TOOL AND STUDY SELECTION: We included risk calculation tools that used the Framingham risk equations to generate a global coronary heart disease (CHD) risk. To determine tool accuracy, we reviewed all articles that compared the performance of various Framingham-based risk tools to that of the continuous Framingham risk equations. To determine the feasibility of tool use in clinical practice, we reviewed articles on the availability of the risk factor information required for risk calculation, subjective preference for 1 risk calculator over another, or subjective ease of use. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently reviewed the results of the literature search, all websites, and abstracted all articles for relevant information. DATA SYNTHESIS: Multiple CHD risk calculation tools are available, including risk charts and computerized calculators for personal digital assistants, personal computers, and web-based use. Most are easy to use and available without cost. They require information on age, smoking status, blood pressure, total and HDL cholesterol, and the presence or absence of diabetes. Compared to the full Framingham equations, accuracy for identifying patients at increased risk was generally quite high. Data on the feasibility of tool use was limited.
CONCLUSIONS: Several easy-to-use tools are available for estimating patients' CHD risk. Use of such tools could facilitate better decision making about interventions for primary prevention of CHD, but further research about their actual effect on clinical practice and patient outcomes is required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14687264      PMCID: PMC1494957          DOI: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2003.30107.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  56 in total

Review 1.  Assessment of cardiovascular risk by use of multiple-risk-factor assessment equations: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology.

Authors:  S M Grundy; R Pasternak; P Greenland; S Smith; V Fuster
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1999-09-28       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Coronary and cardiovascular risk estimation for primary prevention: validation of a new Sheffield table in the 1995 Scottish health survey population.

Authors:  E J Wallis; L E Ramsay; I Ul Haq; P Ghahramani; P R Jackson; K Rowland-Yeo; W W Yeo
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-11

3.  Risk assessment in primary prevention of coronary heart disease: randomised comparison of three scoring methods.

Authors:  C G Isles; L D Ritchie; P Murchie; J Norrie
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-11

4.  Joint British recommendations on prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice: summary. British Cardiac Society, British Hyperlipidaemia Association, British Hypertension Society, British Diabetic Association.

Authors: 
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-11

5.  Updated New Zealand cardiovascular disease risk-benefit prediction guide.

Authors:  R Jackson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-03-11

6.  Prevention Conference V: Beyond secondary prevention: identifying the high-risk patient for primary prevention: medical office assessment: Writing Group I.

Authors:  S M Grundy; T Bazzarre; J Cleeman; R B D'Agostino; M Hill; N Houston-Miller; W B Kannel; R Krauss; H M Krumholz; R M Lauer; I S Ockene; R C Pasternak; T Pearson; P M Ridker; D Wood
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2000-01-04       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  Comparison of the Framingham risk function-based coronary chart with risk function from an Italian population study.

Authors:  A Menotti; P E Puddu; M Lanti
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  A comparison of algorithms for initiation of lipid lowering therapy in primary prevention of coronary heart disease.

Authors:  A S Wierzbicki; T M Reynolds; K Gill; S Alg; M A Crook
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Risk       Date:  2000-02

9.  Prediction of coronary heart disease mortality in blacks and whites: pooled data from two national cohorts.

Authors:  Y Liao; D L McGee; R S Cooper
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  1999-07-01       Impact factor: 2.778

10.  Estimation of cardiovascular risk in hypertensive patients in primary care.

Authors:  A A Montgomery; T Fahey; C MacKintosh; D J Sharp; T J Peters
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 5.386

View more
  60 in total

1.  Understanding and modifying physician behavior for prevention and management of cardiovascular disease.

Authors:  Paul A Heidenreich
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  The continuing evolution of women's health.

Authors:  Marilyn M Schapira; Joan Neuner
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 5.128

Review 3.  Traditional statistical methods for evaluating prediction models are uninformative as to clinical value: towards a decision analytic framework.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Angel M Cronin
Journal:  Semin Oncol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.929

Review 4.  Accuracy and impact of risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review.

Authors:  P Brindle; A Beswick; T Fahey; S Ebrahim
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2006-04-18       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Aspirin for primary cardiovascular prevention: when is it worth the risks?

Authors:  Patricia A Howard
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2014-06

6.  Is Isolated Low High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol a Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factor? New Insights From the Framingham Offspring Study.

Authors:  Jacquelaine Bartlett; Irene M Predazzi; Scott M Williams; William S Bush; Yeunjung Kim; Stephen Havas; Peter P Toth; Sergio Fazio; Michael Miller
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2016-05-10

7.  Cardiovascular risk prediction models with myocardial perfusion imaging in chronic kidney disease: ACCESSing digits or focusing on the patient?

Authors:  Dimitri Patriki; Andreas A Giannopoulos
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 5.952

8.  A new method for determining physician decision thresholds using empiric, uncertain recommendations.

Authors:  Michael V Boland; Harold P Lehmann
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 2.796

9.  Coronary risk assessment by point-based vs. equation-based Framingham models: significant implications for clinical care.

Authors:  William J Gordon; Jesse M Polansky; W John Boscardin; Kathy Z Fung; Michael A Steinman
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2010-09-08       Impact factor: 5.128

10.  Realising the potential of the family history in risk assessment and primary prevention of coronary heart disease in primary care: ADDFAM study protocol.

Authors:  Nadeem Qureshi; Sarah Armstrong; Paula Saukko; Tracey Sach; Jo Middlemass; Phil H Evans; Joe Kai; Hannah Farrimond; Steve E Humphries
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-10-12       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.