schliessen

Filtern

 

Bibliotheken

Validation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women

Background: Health risk appraisal tools may be useful for identifying individuals who would benefit from lifestyle changes and increased surveillance. We evaluated the validity of the Your Disease Risk tool (YDR) for estimating relative risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) among middle-aged women. M... Full description

Journal Title: De Vito Katerina M., Heather J. Baer, Hank Dart, Stephanie E. Chiuve, Eric B. Rimm, and Graham A. Colditz. 2015. “Validation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women.” BMC Women's Health 15 (1): 101. doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x.
Main Author: De Vito, Katerina M.
Other Authors: Baer, Heather J. , Dart, Hank , Chiuve, Stephanie E. , Rimm, Eric B. , Colditz, Graham A.
Format: Electronic Article Electronic Article
Language: English
Subjects:
ID: ISSN: 1472-6874 ; DOI: 10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x
Zum Text:
SendSend as email Add to Book BagAdd to Book Bag
Staff View
recordid: dash1/23845377
title: Validation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women
format: Article
creator:
  • De Vito, Katerina M.
  • Baer, Heather J.
  • Dart, Hank
  • Chiuve, Stephanie E.
  • Rimm, Eric B.
  • Colditz, Graham A.
subjects:
  • Coronary Heart Disease
  • Women
  • Risk Assessment
ispartof: De Vito, Katerina M., Heather J. Baer, Hank Dart, Stephanie E. Chiuve, Eric B. Rimm, and Graham A. Colditz. 2015. “Validation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women.” BMC Women's Health 15 (1): 101. doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x.
description: Background: Health risk appraisal tools may be useful for identifying individuals who would benefit from lifestyle changes and increased surveillance. We evaluated the validity of the Your Disease Risk tool (YDR) for estimating relative risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) among middle-aged women. Methods: We included 55,802 women in the Nurses’ Health Study who completed a mailed questionnaire about risk factors in 1994 and had no history of heart disease at that time. Participants were followed through 2004 for the occurrence of CHD. We estimated each woman’s 10-year relative risk of CHD using YDR, and we compared the estimated YDR relative risk category (ranging from “very much below average” to “very much above average”) to the observed relative risk for each category using logistic regression. We also examined the discriminatory accuracy of YDR using concordance statistics (c-statistics). Results: There were 1165 CHD events during the 10-year follow-up period. Compared to the “about average” category, the observed age-adjusted relative risk was 0.43 (95 % confidence interval: 0.33, 0.56) for the “very much below average” category and 2.48 (95 % confidence interval: 1.68, 3.67) for the “very much above average” category. The age-adjusted c-statistic for the model including the YDR relative risk category was 0.71 (95 % confidence interval: 0.69, 0.72). The model performed better in younger than older women. Conclusion: The YDR tool appears to have moderate validity for estimating 10-year relative risk of CHD in this population of middle-aged women. Further research should aim to improve the tool’s performance and to examine its validity in other populations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
language: eng
source:
identifier: ISSN: 1472-6874 ; DOI: 10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x
fulltext: fulltext_linktorsrc
issn:
  • 1472-6874
  • 14726874
url: Link


@attributes
ID1246696104
RANK0.07
NO1
SEARCH_ENGINEprimo_central_multiple_fe
SEARCH_ENGINE_TYPEPrimo Central Search Engine
LOCALfalse
PrimoNMBib
record
control
sourcerecordid1/23845377
sourceiddash
recordidTN_dash1/23845377
sourcesystemPC
pqid1732595289
galeid448000215
display
typearticle
titleValidation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women
creatorDe Vito, Katerina M. ; Baer, Heather J. ; Dart, Hank ; Chiuve, Stephanie E. ; Rimm, Eric B. ; Colditz, Graham A.
ispartofDe Vito, Katerina M., Heather J. Baer, Hank Dart, Stephanie E. Chiuve, Eric B. Rimm, and Graham A. Colditz. 2015. “Validation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women.” BMC Women's Health 15 (1): 101. doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x.
identifierISSN: 1472-6874 ; DOI: 10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x
subjectCoronary Heart Disease ; Women ; Risk Assessment
descriptionBackground: Health risk appraisal tools may be useful for identifying individuals who would benefit from lifestyle changes and increased surveillance. We evaluated the validity of the Your Disease Risk tool (YDR) for estimating relative risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) among middle-aged women. Methods: We included 55,802 women in the Nurses’ Health Study who completed a mailed questionnaire about risk factors in 1994 and had no history of heart disease at that time. Participants were followed through 2004 for the occurrence of CHD. We estimated each woman’s 10-year relative risk of CHD using YDR, and we compared the estimated YDR relative risk category (ranging from “very much below average” to “very much above average”) to the observed relative risk for each category using logistic regression. We also examined the discriminatory accuracy of YDR using concordance statistics (c-statistics). Results: There were 1165 CHD events during the 10-year follow-up period. Compared to the “about average” category, the observed age-adjusted relative risk was 0.43 (95 % confidence interval: 0.33, 0.56) for the “very much below average” category and 2.48 (95 % confidence interval: 1.68, 3.67) for the “very much above average” category. The age-adjusted c-statistic for the model including the YDR relative risk category was 0.71 (95 % confidence interval: 0.69, 0.72). The model performed better in younger than older women. Conclusion: The YDR tool appears to have moderate validity for estimating 10-year relative risk of CHD in this population of middle-aged women. Further research should aim to improve the tool’s performance and to examine its validity in other populations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
languageeng
source
version6
oafree_for_read
lds50peer_reviewed
links
openurl$$Topenurl_article
backlink
0$$Uhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x$$EView_record
1$$Uhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4640388/pdf/$$EView_record
linktorsrc$$Uhttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:23845377$$EView_full_text_in_Digital_Access_to_Scholarship_at_Harvard_(DASH)
openurlfulltext$$Topenurlfull_article
search
creatorcontrib
0De Vito, Katerina M.
1Baer, Heather J.
2Dart, Hank
3Chiuve, Stephanie E.
4Rimm, Eric B.
5Colditz, Graham A.
titleValidation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women
descriptionBackground: Health risk appraisal tools may be useful for identifying individuals who would benefit from lifestyle changes and increased surveillance. We evaluated the validity of the Your Disease Risk tool (YDR) for estimating relative risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) among middle-aged women. Methods: We included 55,802 women in the Nurses’ Health Study who completed a mailed questionnaire about risk factors in 1994 and had no history of heart disease at that time. Participants were followed through 2004 for the occurrence of CHD. We estimated each woman’s 10-year relative risk of CHD using YDR, and we compared the estimated YDR relative risk category (ranging from “very much below average” to “very much above average”) to the observed relative risk for each category using logistic regression. We also examined the discriminatory accuracy of YDR using concordance statistics (c-statistics). Results: There were 1165 CHD events during the 10-year follow-up period. Compared to the “about average” category, the observed age-adjusted relative risk was 0.43 (95 % confidence interval: 0.33, 0.56) for the “very much below average” category and 2.48 (95 % confidence interval: 1.68, 3.67) for the “very much above average” category. The age-adjusted c-statistic for the model including the YDR relative risk category was 0.71 (95 % confidence interval: 0.69, 0.72). The model performed better in younger than older women. Conclusion: The YDR tool appears to have moderate validity for estimating 10-year relative risk of CHD in this population of middle-aged women. Further research should aim to improve the tool’s performance and to examine its validity in other populations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
subject
0Coronary heart disease
1Women
2Risk assessment
general
0Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH)
1BioMed Central
2English
310.1186/s12905-015-0250-x
sourceiddash
recordiddash1/23845377
issn
01472-6874
114726874
rsrctypearticle
creationdate2015
searchscopedash
scopedash
lsr30VSR-Enriched:[pqid, issue, vol, galeid, date, pages]
sort
titleValidation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women
authorDe Vito, Katerina M. ; Baer, Heather J. ; Dart, Hank ; Chiuve, Stephanie E. ; Rimm, Eric B. ; Colditz, Graham A.
creationdate20150000
facets
frbrgroupid7257539865762703160
frbrtype5
newrecords20170302
languageeng
creationdate2015
topic
0Coronary Heart Disease
1Women
2Risk Assessment
collectionDASH (Harvard Library)
prefilterarticles
rsrctypearticles
creatorcontrib
0De Vito, Katerina M
1Baer, Heather J
2Dart, Hank
3Chiuve, Stephanie E
4Rimm, Eric B
5Colditz, Graham A
jtitleBMC Women's Health
toplevelpeer_reviewed
delivery
delcategoryRemote Search Resource
fulltextfulltext_linktorsrc
addata
aulast
0De Vito
1Baer
2Dart
3Chiuve
4Rimm
5Colditz
aufirst
0Katerina M.
1Heather J.
2Hank
3Stephanie E.
4Eric B.
5Graham A.
au
0De Vito, Katerina M.
1Baer, Heather J.
2Dart, Hank
3Chiuve, Stephanie E.
4Rimm, Eric B.
5Colditz, Graham A.
atitleValidation of a risk prediction tool for coronary heart disease in middle-aged women
jtitleBMC Women's Health
risdate2015
issn1472-6874
genrearticle
ristypeJOUR
abstractBackground: Health risk appraisal tools may be useful for identifying individuals who would benefit from lifestyle changes and increased surveillance. We evaluated the validity of the Your Disease Risk tool (YDR) for estimating relative risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) among middle-aged women. Methods: We included 55,802 women in the Nurses’ Health Study who completed a mailed questionnaire about risk factors in 1994 and had no history of heart disease at that time. Participants were followed through 2004 for the occurrence of CHD. We estimated each woman’s 10-year relative risk of CHD using YDR, and we compared the estimated YDR relative risk category (ranging from “very much below average” to “very much above average”) to the observed relative risk for each category using logistic regression. We also examined the discriminatory accuracy of YDR using concordance statistics (c-statistics). Results: There were 1165 CHD events during the 10-year follow-up period. Compared to the “about average” category, the observed age-adjusted relative risk was 0.43 (95 % confidence interval: 0.33, 0.56) for the “very much below average” category and 2.48 (95 % confidence interval: 1.68, 3.67) for the “very much above average” category. The age-adjusted c-statistic for the model including the YDR relative risk category was 0.71 (95 % confidence interval: 0.69, 0.72). The model performed better in younger than older women. Conclusion: The YDR tool appears to have moderate validity for estimating 10-year relative risk of CHD in this population of middle-aged women. Further research should aim to improve the tool’s performance and to examine its validity in other populations. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
pubBioMed Central
doi10.1186/s12905-015-0250-x
urlhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4640388/pdf/
issue101
volume15
pages101
oafree_for_read
date2015-11-10