Developing Non-Laboratory Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Charts and Validating Laboratory and Non-Laboratory-Based Models.
Mohebian, Mohammad Reza
Gaziano, Thomas Andrew
Jackson, Rodney T
Angelantonio, Emanuele Di
Ubiquity Press, Ltd.
MetadataShow full item record
Hassannejad, R., Mansourian, M., Marateb, H., Mohebian, M. R., Gaziano, T. A., Jackson, R. T., Angelantonio, E. D., & et al. (2021). Developing Non-Laboratory Cardiovascular Risk Assessment Charts and Validating Laboratory and Non-Laboratory-Based Models.. Glob Heart, 16 (1) https://doi.org/10.5334/gh.890
BACKGROUND: Developing simplified risk assessment model based on non-laboratory risk factors that could determine cardiovascular risk as accurately as laboratory-based one can be valuable, particularly in developing countries where there are limited resources. OBJECTIVE: To develop a simplified non-laboratory cardiovascular disease risk assessment chart based on previously reported laboratory-based chart and evaluate internal and external validation, and recalibration of both risk models to assess the performance of risk scoring tools in other population. METHODS: A 10-year non-laboratory-based risk prediction chart was developed for fatal and non-fatal CVD using Cox Proportional Hazard regression. Data from the Isfahan Cohort Study (ICS), a population-based study among 6504 adults aged ≥ 35 years, followed-up for at least ten years was used for the non-laboratory-based model derivation. Participants were followed up until the occurrence of CVD events. Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (TLGS) data was used to evaluate the external validity of both non-laboratory and laboratory risk assessment models in other populations rather than one used in the model derivation. RESULTS: The discrimination and calibration analysis of the non-laboratory model showed the following values of Harrell's C: 0.73 (95% CI 0.71-0.74), and Nam-D'Agostino χ2:11.01 (p = 0.27), respectively. The non-laboratory model was in agreement and classified high risk and low risk patients as accurately as the laboratory one. Both non-laboratory and laboratory risk prediction models showed good discrimination in the external validation, with Harrell's C of 0.77 (95% CI 0.75-0.78) and 0.78 (95% CI 0.76-0.79), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our simplified risk assessment model based on non-laboratory risk factors could determine cardiovascular risk as accurately as laboratory-based one. This approach can provide simple risk assessment tool where laboratory testing is unavailable, inconvenient, and costly.
Cardiovascular disease, risk assessment, Isfahan Cohort Study, Laboratory-Based Model, Non-Laboratory-Based Model, Humans, Cardiovascular Diseases, Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Cohort Studies, Adult, Laboratories, Iran, Heart Disease Risk Factors
British Heart Foundation (None)
British Heart Foundation (CH/12/2/29428)
British Heart Foundation (RG/18/13/33946)
External DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gh.890
This record's URL: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/332166
Attribution 4.0 International
Licence URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/