Literature DB >> 1656798

Comparing the predictive accuracy of health risk appraisal: the Centers for Disease Control versus Carter Center program.

J A Gazmararian1, B Foxman, L T Yen, H Morgenstern, D W Edington.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: From 1986 to 1987 the Carter Center of Emory University joined with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to develop a new, probability-based, adult health risk appraisal (HRA) instrument for the public domain. This new instrument is compared with the CDC HRA version to determine which is a more accurate predictor of mortality.
METHODS: We compared predicted mortality risks from the CDC HRA and the Carter Center HRA with the observed mortality among 3135 smokers and never-smoking persons, aged 25 to 60, followed from 1959 to 1979 as part of the Tecumseh Community Health Study.
RESULTS: When individuals were classified according to the difference between their actual age and risk age, for the CDC HRA, there was a progressively increasing risk of 10-year mortality as the difference increased. The Carter Center HRA did not show this trend. An analysis using relative operating characteristic curves showed that the mortality risk predictions for both programs were very similar for men and women. However, differences between actual age and risk age for the two programs were not similar for men or women, particularly older men. Therefore, actual age minus risk age for the CDC program was a more accurate predictor of 10-year mortality than was this difference for the Carter Center program.
CONCLUSIONS: The results from both types of analyses suggest that the validity of risk ages obtained from the Carter Center version may not be sufficient to justify updating programs for those currently using the CDC instrument.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1656798      PMCID: PMC1405330          DOI: 10.2105/ajph.81.10.1296

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Public Health        ISSN: 0090-0036            Impact factor:   9.308


  11 in total

1.  SURVEY METHODS IN GENERAL POPULATIONS. STUDIES OF A TOTAL COMMUNITY. TECUMSEH, MICHIGAN.

Authors:  T FRANCIS; F H EPSTEIN
Journal:  Milbank Mem Fund Q       Date:  1965-04

2.  Behavioral science perspectives on health hazard/health risk appraisal.

Authors:  M H Becker; N K Janz
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Health risk appraisal: review of evidence for effectiveness.

Authors:  V J Schoenbach; E H Wagner; W L Beery
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  The validity of health risk appraisal instruments for assessing coronary heart disease risk.

Authors:  K W Smith; S M McKinlay; B D Thorington
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1987-04       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  The reliability of health risk appraisals: a field trial of four instruments.

Authors:  K W Smith; S M McKinlay; J B McKinlay
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  The use of epidemiologic data for personal risk assessment in health hazard/health risk appraisal programs.

Authors:  V J Schoenbach; E H Wagner; J M Karon
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1983

7.  Use of relative operating characteristic analysis in epidemiology. A method for dealing with subjective judgement.

Authors:  L S Erdreich; E T Lee
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-11       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Health risk appraisal: some methodologic considerations.

Authors:  A A Goetz; R B McTyre
Journal:  Nurs Res       Date:  1981 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.381

9.  The accuracy of health risk appraisal in predicting mortality.

Authors:  B Foxman; D W Edington
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 9.308

10.  An evaluation of the health hazard appraisal based on survey data from a randomly selected population.

Authors:  M A Safer
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1982 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.792

View more
  8 in total

1.  Impact of the prevention plan on employee health risk reduction.

Authors:  Ronald Loeppke; Dee W Edington; Sami Bég
Journal:  Popul Health Manag       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 2.459

2.  Using health risk appraisal in clinical practice.

Authors:  L Hill; N Faine
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1992-05

3.  Do cigarette smokers have unrealistic perceptions of their heart attack, cancer, and stroke risks?

Authors:  V J Strecher; M W Kreuter; S C Kobrin
Journal:  J Behav Med       Date:  1995-02

4.  Health and Economics of Lifestyle Medicine Strategies.

Authors:  Dee W Edington; Wayne N Burton; Alyssa B Schultz
Journal:  Am J Lifestyle Med       Date:  2020-02-22

5.  Predictive accuracy of a health risk appraisal program using mortality risk age in 116,927 Korean men.

Authors:  Ju-Young Kim; Byung-Joo Park; Yoon Kim; Jin-Ho Park; Be-Long Cho
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2011-01-24       Impact factor: 2.153

6.  The utility of a health risk assessment in providing care for a rural free clinic population.

Authors:  Paula D Scariati; Cyndy Williams
Journal:  Osteopath Med Prim Care       Date:  2007-03-23

7.  Effects of physical examination and diet consultation on serum cholesterol and health-behavior in the Korean pilots employed in commercial airline.

Authors:  Yun Young Choi; Ki Youn Kim
Journal:  Ind Health       Date:  2013-10-16       Impact factor: 2.179

8.  Application of ensemble machine learning algorithms on lifestyle factors and wearables for cardiovascular risk prediction.

Authors:  Weiting Huang; Tan Wei Ying; Woon Loong Calvin Chin; Lohendran Baskaran; Ong Eng Hock Marcus; Khung Keong Yeo; Ng See Kiong
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 4.379

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.