EBM

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

Evidence-Based Medicine 2007;12:87; doi:10.1136/ebm.12.3.87
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Havranek, E. P
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Havranek, E. P

Clinical prediction guide

Review: Framingham risk scores have variable accuracy in predicting CVD events in different patient populations

Brindle P, Beswick A, Fahey T, et al. Accuracy and impact of risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review. Heart 2006;92:1752–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Q In different groups of patients, are Framingham risk assessments accurate for predicting cardiovascular disease (CVD) events? Do risk assessments improve health outcomes?

Clinical impact ratings GP/FP/Primary care ******{star} Cardiology ******{star} Internal medicine *****{star}{star}

Key Words: cardiovascular diseases

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

METHODS
Formula Data sources: Medline, EMBASE/Excerpta Medica, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), CINAHL, PsycINFO, ISI Proceedings, British Library’s Electronic Table of Contents (ZETOC), bibliographies of relevant studies, and hand searches of key journals (to September 2004).

Formula Study selection and assessment: studies in any language that compared risk of fatal and non-fatal coronary heart disease (CHD) or CVD outcomes predicted by Framingham risk scores with observed 10 year risk, and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effectiveness of CV risk scores to aid primary prevention in patients predominantly free of symptomatic CVD. Studies of older risk scores not used in clinical practice and studies reporting only fatal outcomes were excluded. 27 risk assessment studies (n = 71 727, age range 30–80 y) met the selection criteria: 8 studies evaluated the Wilson Framingham method, and 19 evaluated the Anderson Framingham method. The year of initiation of study recruitment ranged from 1961–1996. 4 RCTs . . . [Full text of this article]

Edward P Havranek, MD

Denver Health Medical Center,
Denver, Colorado, USA







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2007 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.