Cardiovascular risk functions, and their practical relevance: To be trusted or not to be trusted

Antonio Conti, A. A. Conti, G. F. Gensini

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

The practical reliability of the 20% risk threshold is examined, as fixed by the Italian Health Ministry using the European Joint Task Force(JES) 'chart of coronary risk'. Two different risk functions, one derived from the Framingham study and one from the PROCAM study, are compared. The comparison has been carried out in a homogeneous way. The data base is represented by 4584 Italian subjects (2067 males, 2517 females) on primary prevention, who participated in the RAI (Registro ANCE Ipertensione) study. The results show that there are 131 subjects (out of 271; 48.3%) who have a larger that 20% risk using the JES/Framingham algorithm, but are below threshold using the PROCAM one. Although any cut introduces a subjective measure, the choice of different risk functions is relevant in a high percentage of borderline cases, thus changing the status from 'high risk' to lower risk and vice versa.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComputers in Cardiology
EditorsA. Murray
Pages553-556
Number of pages4
Volume29
Publication statusPublished - 2002
EventComputers in Cardiology 2002 - Memphis, TN, United States
Duration: Sep 22 2002Sep 25 2002

Other

OtherComputers in Cardiology 2002
CountryUnited States
CityMemphis, TN
Period9/22/029/25/02

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Software
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Cardiovascular risk functions, and their practical relevance: To be trusted or not to be trusted'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this

    Conti, A., Conti, A. A., & Gensini, G. F. (2002). Cardiovascular risk functions, and their practical relevance: To be trusted or not to be trusted. In A. Murray (Ed.), Computers in Cardiology (Vol. 29, pp. 553-556)