Improvement of cardiovascular risk prediction: Time to review current knowledge, debates, and fundamentals on how to assess test characteristics

European Journal of Preventive Cardiology

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 18-23

  Romanens, Michel ^a   Ackermann, Franz ^b   Spence, John David ^c   Darioli, Roger ^d   Rodondi, Nicolas ^d   Corti, Roberto ^e   Noll, Georg ^e   Schwenkglenks, Matthias ^f   Pencina, Michael ^g  

^a KANTONSSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^b Vascular Risk Foundation   (Switzerland)

^c Stroke Prevention and Atherosclerosis Research Centre   (Canada)

^d LAUSANNE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Switzerland)

^e UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^f Basel   (Switzerland)

^g Boston University   (United States)

Author keywords

myocardial infarction; risk prediction; statistical methods

Indexed keywords

ATHEROSCLEROSIS; CALCULATION; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; ECONOMIC ASPECT; HUMAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; REVIEW;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; CAROTID ARTERY DISEASES; CHOLESTEROL, HDL; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; DYSLIPIDEMIAS; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; LIKELIHOOD FUNCTIONS; MODELS, STATISTICAL; ODDS RATIO; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; ROC CURVE;

EID: 77149133745     PISSN: 20474873     EISSN: 20474881     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/HJR.0b013e3283347059     Document Type: Review

References (24)

1. Riesen W, Darioli R, Noseda G, Bertel O, Buser P. Recommendations for the prevention ofatherosclerosis. Schweiz Aerztezeitung 2005; 86: 1355–1361.
2. Von Eckardstein A, Schulte H, Assmann G. Comparison of international consensus recommendations for thedetection of healthy risk subjects at high risk for myocardial infarction inGermany. Zeitschrift fUr Kardiologie 2005; 94: 52–60.
3. Conroy M, Pyörälä K, Fitzgerald AP, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, et al. Estimation of ten-year risk of fatalcardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project. Eur Heart J 2003; 24: 987–1003.
4. Richter K, Lange S. Methods for the evaluation of a diagnosis. Internist 1997; 38: 325–336.
5. Steurer J. Expressions with high importance for the interpretation ofscientific papers dealing with the description of a diagnostictest. Schweiz Rundschau Med Praxis 1997; 86: 945.
6. Speich R. The process of obtaining a diagnosis in internal medicine:decision analysis or intuition? Lecture at the Zurich University,April 4th 1996. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 1997; 127: 1263–1279.
7. Glenck U, Pewsner D, Bucher H. Evidence-based medicine: how do I evaluate a study about thevalue of a diagnostic test. Schweiz Med Forum 2001; 9: 213–220.
8. Assmann G, Cullen P, Fruchart G, Greten H, Naruszewicz M, Olsson A, et al. Implications of emerging risk factors fortherapeutic intervention. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2005; 15: 373–381.
9. Naghavi M, Falk E, Hecht H, Jamieson M, Kaul S, Berman D, et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerablepatient—part III: executive summary of the screening for heartattack prevention and education (SHAPE) task force report. Am J Cardiol 2006; 98(Suppl):2H–15H.
10. Cook N. Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve inrisk prediction. Circulation 2007; 115: 928–935.
11. Sackett D, Strauss S, Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes R. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. New York, Edinburgh, London, Toronto, Philadelphia, St. Louis,Sidney: ChurchillLivingstone; 2000.
12. Ridker P, Rifai N, Rose L, Buring J, Cook N. Comparison of C-reactive protein and low-density lipoproteincholesterol levels in the prediction of first cardiovascularevents. N Engl J Med 2002; 347: 1557–1565.
13. O'Leary D, Wolfson S, Kronmal R, Manolio T, Burke G, Wolfson S, et al. Carotid-artery intima and media thicknessas a risk factor for myocardial infarction and stroke in olderadults. N Engl J Med 1999; 240: 14–22.
14. Folsom A, Chambless L, Ballantyne C, Coresh J, Heiss G, Wu K, et al. An assessment of incremental coronaryrisk prediction using C-reactive protein and other novel risk markers. Theatherosclerosis risk in communities study. ArchIntern Med 2006; 166: 1368–1373.
15. Miller M, Zhan M, Havas S. High attributable risk of elevated C-reactive protein level toconventional coronary heart disease risk factors. The Third National Healthand Nutrition Examination Survey. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 2063–2068.
16. Del Sol A, Moons K, Hollander M, Hofman A, Koudstaal P, Grobbee D, et al. Is carotid intima-media thickness usefulin cardiovascular disease risk assessment? Stroke 2001; 32: 1532–1538.
17. Pencina M, D'Agostino R, D'Agostino RB Jr, Vasan R. Evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: fromarea under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond. Stat Med 2008; 27: 157–172.
18. Newcombe RG. Interval estimation for the difference between independentproportions: comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med 1998; 17: 873–890.
19. Bayes ET. An assay toward solving a problem in the doctrin ofchance. Philos Trans R Soc Lond (Biol) 1763; 53: 370–418.
20. Fagan TJ. Nomogram for Bayes theorem. N Engl J Med 1975; 293: 257.
21. Martikainen J, Ottelin A, Kiviniemi V, Gylling H. Plant stanol esters are potentially cost-effective in theprevention of coronary heart disease in men: Bayesian modellingapproach. Eur J Cardiovas Prevent Rehabil 2007; 14: 265–272.
22. Khairy P. Programmed ventricular stimulation for risk stratification in patientswith tetralogy of Fallot: a Bayesian perspective.www.nature.com/clinicalpractice.doi:10.1038/ncpcardio0882.
23. Spence D, Eliasziw M, Di Cicco M, Hackam D, Lohmann R. Carotid plaque area: a tool for targeting and evaluating vascularpreventive therapy. Stroke 2002; 33: 2916–2922.
24. Greenland S. The need for reorientation toward cost-effective prediction:comments on evaluating the added predictive ability of a new marker: fromarea under the ROC curve to reclassification and beyond by Pencina M.J., et al. Stat Med 2008; 27: 199–206.