AIM/ OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to validate the Rose Angina Questionnaire (RAQ) to detect coronary heart disease (CHD) by comparing with cardiologists' diagnoses in Bangladesh. METHODS: Patients aged 40-75 years attending to two cardiac hospitals were diagnosed as either CHD positive or CHD negative by cardiologists. The RAQ was used to reclassify them into CHD positive [RAQ] and CHD negative [RAQ]. FINDINGS: There were 302 CHD positive [cardiologists] and 302 CHD negative [cardiologists] individuals. The RAQ reclassified 194 individuals as CHD positive [RAQ] and 409 individuals as CHD negative [RAQ]. Therefore, the RAQ had 53% sensitivity and 89% specificity. There was no difference in sensitivity and specificity during subgroup analyzes by age and gender; the sensitivity was higher among people from lower socio-economic status. CONCLUSION: The RAQ, having moderate sensitivity but high specificity to detect CHD, can be used to screen individuals at risk of CHD in large-scale epidemiological surveys.
AIM/ OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to validate the Rose Angina Questionnaire (RAQ) to detect coronary heart disease (CHD) by comparing with cardiologists' diagnoses in Bangladesh. METHODS:Patients aged 40-75 years attending to two cardiac hospitals were diagnosed as either CHD positive or CHD negative by cardiologists. The RAQ was used to reclassify them into CHD positive [RAQ] and CHD negative [RAQ]. FINDINGS: There were 302 CHD positive [cardiologists] and 302 CHD negative [cardiologists] individuals. The RAQ reclassified 194 individuals as CHD positive [RAQ] and 409 individuals as CHD negative [RAQ]. Therefore, the RAQ had 53% sensitivity and 89% specificity. There was no difference in sensitivity and specificity during subgroup analyzes by age and gender; the sensitivity was higher among people from lower socio-economic status. CONCLUSION: The RAQ, having moderate sensitivity but high specificity to detect CHD, can be used to screen individuals at risk of CHD in large-scale epidemiological surveys.
Authors: Hok-Hay S Oei; Rozemarijn Vliegenthart; Jaap W Deckers; Albert Hofman; Matthijs Oudkerk; Jacqueline C M Witteman Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Muhammad Aziz Rahman; Nicola Spurrier; Mohammad Afzal Mahmood; Mahmudur Rahman; Sohel Reza Choudhury; Stephen Leeder Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-01-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Maria A Woodward; Nita G Valikodath; Paula Anne Newman-Casey; Leslie M Niziol; David C Musch; Paul P Lee Journal: Eye Contact Lens Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 2.018
Authors: Sukumar Vellakkal; Christopher Millett; Sanjay Basu; Zaky Khan; Amina Aitsi-Selmi; David Stuckler; Shah Ebrahim Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2014-12-30 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Charles F Hayfron-Benjamin; Bert-Jan van den Born; Albert G B Amoah; Anke H Maitland-van der Zee; Karlijn A C Meeks; Erik J A J Beune; Kerstin Klipstein-Grobusch; Charles Agyemang Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-10-01
Authors: Charles F Hayfron-Benjamin; Charlotte Mosterd; Anke H Maitland-van der Zee; Daniel H van Raalte; Albert G B Amoah; Charles Agyemang; Bert-Jan van den Born Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2021-07-07
Authors: Sukumar Vellakkal; S V Subramanian; Christopher Millett; Sanjay Basu; David Stuckler; Shah Ebrahim Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-07-15 Impact factor: 3.240