Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (22)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Haq, I.U.
Right arrow Articles by Wallis, E.J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Haq, I.U.
Right arrow Articles by Wallis, E.J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Q J Med 1999; 92: 379-385
© 1999 Association of Physicians

Prediction of coronary risk for primary prevention of coronary heart disease: a comparison of methods

I.U. Haq, L.E. Ramsay, P.R. Jackson and E.J. Wallis

From the Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK

Received 23 April 1999

Professor L.E. Ramsay, Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Floor L, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Glossop Road, Sheffield S10 2JF. e-mail: d.colley{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Most recent guidelines advise targeting of lipid lowering for primary prevention at those at high absolute coronary (CHD) risk. We compared the accuracy of five CHD risk assessment methods in identifying such patients: one based on total cholesterol >=6.5 mmol/l plus two risk factors, and four based on the Framingham risk function (the European Task Force chart and Sheffield table, both using total cholesterol and the New Zealand chart and modified Sheffield table, both using total : HDL cholesterol ratio) for predicting CHD event risk >=2% per year, calculated by an independent risk function, PROCAM, in 126 treated hypertensive men. Cholesterol threshold plus two risk factors had sensitivity 59% and specificity 63%, did not identify some very high-risk patients, and identified very low-risk patients. Framingham-based methods using total cholesterol alone had sensitivity 90–98% and specificity 37–43%, and identified high-risk patients well, but identified some patients at very low risk. Methods based on total : HDL cholesterol ratio had sensitivity 90–98% and specificity 60–63%, and did not identify incorrectly patients at very low CHD risk. Methods based on cholesterol threshold and counting of risk factors are too inaccurate for targeting drug therapy for primary prevention of CHD. Framingham-based methods should incorporate HDL-cholesterol as the total : HDL cholesterol ratio.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
C. Ballantyne, B. Arroll, and J. Shepherd
Lipids and CVD management: towards a global consensus
Eur. Heart J., November 1, 2005; 26(21): 2224 - 2231.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
E. S. Ford, W. H. Giles, and A. H. Mokdad
The distribution of 10-Year risk for coronary heart disease among U.S. adults: Findings from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 19, 2004; 43(10): 1791 - 1796.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
F. J. Pashkow
The prudent person's paradox
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 7, 2003; 41(9): 1480 - 1481.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eur Heart JHome page
H.-W. Hense, H. Schulte, H. Lowel, G. Assmann, and U. Keil
Framingham risk function overestimates risk of coronary heart disease in men and women from Germany--results from the MONICA Augsburg and the PROCAM cohorts
Eur. Heart J., May 2, 2003; 24(10): 937 - 945.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Postgrad. Med. J.Home page
K S Rabindranath, N R Anderson, R Gama, and M R Holland
Comparative evaluation of the new Sheffield table and the modified joint British societies coronary risk prediction chart against a laboratory based risk score calculation
Postgrad. Med. J., May 1, 2002; 78(919): 269 - 272.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
HeartHome page
I U Haq, L E Ramsay, E J Wallis, C G Isles, L D Ritchie, and P R Jackson
Population implications of lipid lowering for prevention of coronary heart disease: data from the 1995 Scottish health survey
Heart, September 1, 2001; 86(3): 289 - 295.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
HeartHome page
P S Sanmuganathan, P Ghahramani, P R Jackson, E J Wallis, and L E Ramsay
Aspirin for primary prevention of coronary heart disease: safety and absolute benefit related to coronary risk derived from meta-analysis of randomised trials
Heart, March 1, 2001; 85(3): 265 - 271.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
BMJHome page
E. J Wallis, L. E Ramsay, I. U. Haq, P. Ghahramani, P. R Jackson, K. Rowland-Yeo, and W. W Yeo
Coronary and cardiovascular risk estimation for primary prevention: validation of a new Sheffield table in the 1995 Scottish health survey population
BMJ, March 11, 2000; 320(7236): 671 - 676.
[Abstract] [Full Text]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.