Oude en nieuwe scoresystemen voor het schatten van cardiovasculaire risico's: Beperkingen in de validiteit, de precisie en de homogeniteit van de risicocategorieën

Translated title of the contribution: Old and new scoring systems for assessing cardiovascular risks: Problems with the validity, the precision and the homogenicity of the risk categories

Y. M. Smulders*, A. M.W. Spijkerman, P. J. Kostense, L. M. Bouter, C. D.A. Stehouwer

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

    25 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Scoring systems for cardiovascular-risk assessment are increasingly being used to identify patients suitable for primary prevention measures. However, the quality of risk-score systems is threatened by (a) external invalidity, which can be partly compensated for by calibration of the score, (b) risk-score model imprecision, reflected by wide confidence intervals for the risk estimate, and (c) risk-category heterogeneity resulting from the random spread of known and unknown risk factors that are unaccounted for in the scoring system. The commonly used Framingham risk score is limited by imprecision and marked risk-category heterogeneity. The recently published SCORE risk model is probably more precise, but lacks homogenous risk categories. To prevent large scale undertreatment of patients at high cardiovascular risk, the commonly used risk threshold for initiating primary preventative treatment should be lowered.

    Translated title of the contributionOld and new scoring systems for assessing cardiovascular risks: Problems with the validity, the precision and the homogenicity of the risk categories
    Original languageDutch
    Pages (from-to)2480-2484
    Number of pages5
    JournalNederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde
    Volume148
    Issue number50
    Publication statusPublished - 11 Dec 2004

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Old and new scoring systems for assessing cardiovascular risks: Problems with the validity, the precision and the homogenicity of the risk categories'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this