Predictive accuracy of original and recalibrated Framingham risk score in the Swiss population.

Details

Ressource 1Download: BIB_E5C1AE6D9B34.P001.pdf (129.52 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: author
Serval ID
serval:BIB_E5C1AE6D9B34
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Predictive accuracy of original and recalibrated Framingham risk score in the Swiss population.
Journal
International Journal of Cardiology
Author(s)
Marques-Vidal P., Rodondi N., Bochud M., Chiolero A., Pécoud A., Hayoz D., Paccaud F., Mooser V., Firmann M., Waeber G., Vollenweider P.
ISSN
1874-1754[electronic]
ISSN-L
0167-5273
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2009
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
133
Number
3
Pages
346-353
Language
english
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive accuracy of the original and recalibrated Framingham risk function on current morbidity from coronary heart disease (CHD) and mortality data from the Swiss population. METHODS: Data from the CoLaus study, a cross-sectional, population-based study conducted between 2003 and 2006 on 5,773 participants aged 35-74 without CHD were used to recalibrate the Framingham risk function. The predicted number of events from each risk function were compared with those issued from local MONICA incidence rates and official mortality data from Switzerland. RESULTS: With the original risk function, 57.3%, 21.2%, 16.4% and 5.1% of men and 94.9%, 3.8%, 1.2% and 0.1% of women were at very low (<6%), low (6-10%), intermediate (10-20%) and high (>20%) risk, respectively. With the recalibrated risk function, the corresponding values were 84.7%, 10.3%, 4.3% and 0.6% in men and 99.5%, 0.4%, 0.0% and 0.1% in women, respectively. The number of CHD events over 10 years predicted by the original Framingham risk function was 2-3 fold higher than predicted by mortality+case fatality or by MONICA incidence rates (men: 191 vs. 92 and 51 events, respectively). The recalibrated risk function provided more reasonable estimates, albeit slightly overestimated (92 events, 5-95th percentile: 26-223 events); sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the overestimation was between 0.4 and 2.2 in men, and 0.7 and 3.3 in women. CONCLUSION: The recalibrated Framingham risk function provides a reasonable alternative to assess CHD risk in men, but not in women.
Keywords
Adult , Aged , Calibration , Coronary Disease/diagnosis* , Coronary Disease/epidemiology* , Coronary Disease/mortality , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Population Groups , Predictive Value of Tests , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Switzerland/epidemiology
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
10/03/2009 7:49
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:09
Usage data