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

Antonio Conti; A. A. Conti; G. F. Gensini

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

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

Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi Onlus

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference 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 language	English
Title of host publication	Computers in Cardiology
Editors	A. Murray
Pages	553-556
Number of pages	4
Volume	29
Publication status	Published - 2002
Event	Computers in Cardiology 2002 - Memphis, TN, United States Duration: Sep 22 2002 → Sep 25 2002

Other

Other	Computers in Cardiology 2002
Country/Territory	United States
City	Memphis, TN
Period	9/22/02 → 9/25/02

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Software
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@inproceedings{221880001be74df8b6747bb74022abf3,

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

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.",

author = "Antonio Conti and Conti, {A. A.} and Gensini, {G. F.}",

year = "2002",

language = "English",

volume = "29",

pages = "553--556",

editor = "A. Murray",

booktitle = "Computers in Cardiology",

note = "Computers in Cardiology 2002 ; Conference date: 22-09-2002 Through 25-09-2002",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Cardiovascular risk functions, and their practical relevance

T2 - Computers in Cardiology 2002

AU - Conti, Antonio

AU - Conti, A. A.

AU - Gensini, G. F.

PY - 2002

Y1 - 2002

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036946124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036946124&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:0036946124

VL - 29

SP - 553

EP - 556

BT - Computers in Cardiology

A2 - Murray, A.

Y2 - 22 September 2002 through 25 September 2002

ER -

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

Abstract

Other

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this