Cardiovascular risk prediction: the old has given way to the new but at what risk-benefit ratio?

Clicks: 273
ID: 6785
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #109 of 242 articles by views in research reports in clinical cardiology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 242 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Cardiovascular risk prediction: the old has given way to the new but at what risk-benefit ratio? Joseph Yeboah Heart and Vascular Center of Excellence, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA Abstract: The ultimate goal of cardiovascular risk prediction is to identify individuals in the population to whom the application or administration of current proven lifestyle modifications and medicinal therapies will result in reduction in cardiovascular disease events and minimal adverse effects (net benefit to society). The use of cardiovascular risk prediction tools dates back to 1976 when the Framingham coronary heart disease risk score was published. Since then a lot of novel risk markers have been identified and other cardiovascular risk prediction tools have been developed to either improve or replace the Framingham Risk Score (FRS). In 2013, the new atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk estimator was published by the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association to replace the FRS for cardiovascular risk prediction. It is too soon to know the performance of the new atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk estimator. The risk-benefit ratio for preventive therapy (lifestyle modifications, statin +/− aspirin) based on cardiovascular disease risk assessed using the FRS is unknown but it was assumed to be a net benefit. Should we also assume the risk-benefit ratio for the new atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk estimator is also a net benefit? Keywords: risk prediction, prevention, cardiovascular disease
Reference Key
joseph2014cardiovascularresearch Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Joseph Yeboah and
Journal research reports in clinical cardiology
Year 2014
DOI
10.2147/RRCC.S44909
URL
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.