Estimating the value of information in strategies for identifying patients at high risk of cardiovascular disease

Informatics in Primary Care

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 85-92

  Marshall, Tom P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cardiovascular disease; Cost effectiveness; Patient identification; Screening

Indexed keywords

ANTIHYPERTENSIVE AGENT;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS; DIABETES MELLITUS; ELECTRONIC SPREADSHEET; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH SURVEY; HIGH RISK PATIENT; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RECORD; OPPORTUNISTIC INFECTION; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PATIENT IDENTIFICATION; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT SELECTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 33750613197     PISSN: 14760320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14236/jhi.v14i2.618     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Williams B, Poulter NR, Brown MJ et al. Guidelines for management of hypertension: report of the Fourth Working Party of the British Hypertension Society, 2004 - BHS IV. Journal of Human Hypertension 2004; 18:139-85.
2. Williams B, Poulter NR, Brown MJ et al. British Hypertension Society guidelines for hypertension management 2004 (BHS-IV): summary. British Medical Journal 2004;328:634-40.
3. Wood D, Durrington P, Poulter N, McInnes G, Rees A and Wray R on behalf of the Societies. Joint British recommendations on prevention of coronary heart disease in clinical practice. Heart 1998;80:Supplement 2.
4. Horsfield P and Teasdale S. Generating information from electronic patient records in general practice: a description of clinical care and gender inequalities in coronary heart disease using data from over two minion patient records. Informatics in Primary Care 2003;11: 137-44.
5. de Lusignan S, Teasdale S, Little D et al. Comprehensive computerised primary care records are an essential component of any national health information strategy: report from an international consensus conference. Informatics in Primary Care 2004;12:25-15-M.
6. Department of Health. Health Survey for England 2003. www.data-archive.ac.uk/
7. Marshall T. When measurements are misleading: modelling the effects of blood pressure misclassification in the English population. British Medical Journal 2004; 328:933.
8. Wright JM and Musini VJ. Blood pressure variability: lessons learned from a systematic review. Poster presentation D20, 8th International Cochrane Colloquium. October 2000, Cape Town. Further details obtained from a personal communication (email) on 21 July 2003.
9. Nazir DJ, Roberts RS, Hill SA and McQueen MJ. Monthly intra-individual variation in lipids over a 1-year period in 22 normal subjects. Clinical Biochemistry 1999; 32:381-9.
10. Marshall T and Rouse A. Resource implications and health benefits of primary prevention strategies for cardiovascular disease in people aged 30 to 74: mathematical modelling study. British Medical Journal 2002; 325:197-9.
11. Department of Health. Health Survey for England 1998. www.data-archive.ac.uk/
12. Anderson KM, Odell PM, Silson PWF and Kannel WB. Cardiovascular disease risk profiles. American Heart Journal 1991;121:293-8.
13. Netten A and Curtil L. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2002. Personal Social Services Research Unit. Canterbury, UK: University of Kent, 2003.
14. Bakx JC, Netea RT, van den Hoogen HJM et al. De invloed van een rustperiode op de bloeddruk. [The influence of a rest period on blood pressure measurement.] Huisarts en Wetenschap 1999;42:53-6.
15. Montgomery AA, Fahey T, Ben-Shlomo Y and Harding J. The influence of absolute cardiovascular risk, patient utilities, and costs on the decision to treat hypertension: a Markov decision analysis. Journal of Hypertension 2003;21:1753-9.
16. Marshall T. The use of cardiovascular risk factor information in practice databases: could we do better? British Journal of General Practice 2006. [Accepted subject to health economics review.]
17. MIQUEST software. www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/miquest