Dataset Information

Can risk be predicted? An umbrella systematic review of current risk prediction models for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and hypertension.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To provide an overview of the currently available risk prediction models (RPMs) for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), diabetes and hypertension, and to compare their effectiveness in proper recognition of patients at risk of developing these diseases.

Design

Umbrella systematic review.

Data sources

PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library.

Eligibility criteria

Systematic reviews or meta-analysis examining and comparing performances of RPMs for CVDs, hypertension or diabetes in healthy adult (18-65 years old) population, published in English language.

Data extraction and synthesis

Data were extracted according to the following parameters: number of studies included, intervention (RPMs applied/assessed), comparison, performance, validation and outcomes. A narrative synthesis was performed. Data were reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.

Study selection

3612 studies were identified. After title/abstract screening and removal of duplicate articles, 37 studies met the eligibility criteria. After reading the full text, 13 were deemed relevant for inclusion. Three further papers from the reference lists of these articles were then added.

Study appraisal

The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the AMSTAR tool.

Risk of bias in individual studies

Risk of Bias evaluation was carried out using the ROBIS tool.

Results

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria: six focused on diabetes, two on hypertension and eight on CVDs. Globally, prediction models for diabetes and hypertension showed no significant difference in effectiveness. Conversely, some promising differences among prediction tools were highlighted for CVDs. The Ankle-Brachial Index, in association with the Framingham tool, and QRISK scores provided some evidence of a certain superiority compared with Framingham alone.

Limitations

Due to the significant heterogeneity of the studies, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis. The electronic search was limited to studies in English and to three major international databases (MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library), with additional works derived from the reference list of other studies; grey literature with unpublished documents was not included in the search. Furthermore, no assessment of potential adverse effects of RPMs was carried out.

Conclusions

Consistent evidence is available only for CVD prediction: the Framingham score, alone or in combination with the Ankle-Brachial Index, and the QRISK score can be confirmed as the gold standard. Further efforts should not be concentrated on creating new scores, but rather on performing external validation of the existing ones, in particular on high-risk groups. Benefits could be further improved by supplementing existing models with information on lifestyle, personal habits, family and employment history, social network relationships, income and education.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018088012.

SUBMITTER: Lucaroni F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6937066 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can risk be predicted? An umbrella systematic review of current risk prediction models for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and hypertension.

Lucaroni Francesca F Cicciarella Modica Domenico D Macino Mattia M Palombi Leonardo L Abbondanzieri Alessio A Agosti Giulia G Biondi Giorgia G Morciano Laura L Vinci Antonio A

BMJ open 20191219 12

<h4>Objective</h4>To provide an overview of the currently available risk prediction models (RPMs) for cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), diabetes and hypertension, and to compare their effectiveness in proper recognition of patients at risk of developing these diseases.<h4>Design</h4>Umbrella systematic review.<h4>Data sources</h4>PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library.<h4>Eligibility criteria</h4>Systematic reviews or meta-analysis examining and comparing performances of RPMs for CVDs, hypertension or d ...[more]

PMID: 31862737

Similar Datasets

Project description:Accurate risk assessment of an individuals' propensity to develop cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) is crucial for the prevention of these conditions. Numerous published risk prediction models used for CVD risk assessment are based on conventional risk factors and include only a limited number of biomarkers. The addition of novel biomarkers can boost the discriminative ability of risk prediction models for CVDs with different pathogenesis. The present study reports the development of risk prediction models for a range of heterogeneous CVDs, including coronary artery disease (CAD), stroke, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), as well as for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2), a major CVD risk factor. In addition to conventional risk factors, the models incorporate various blood biomarkers and comorbidities to improve both individual and population stratification. An automatic variable selection approach was developed to generate the best set of explanatory variables for each model from the initial panel of risk factors. In total, up to 254,220 UK Biobank participants (ranging from 215,269 to 254,220 for different CVDs and DM2) were included in the analyses. The derived prediction models utilizing Cox proportional hazards regression achieved consistent discrimination performance (C-index) for all diseases: CAD, 0.794 (95% CI, 0.787-0.801); DM2, 0.909 (95% CI, 0.903-0.916); stroke, 0.778 (95% CI, 0.756-0.801); DVT, 0.743 (95% CI, 0.737-0.749); and AAA, 0.893 (95% CI, 0.874-0.912). When validated on various subpopulations, they demonstrated higher discrimination in healthier and middle-age individuals. In general, calibration of a five-year risk of developing the CVDs and DM2 demonstrated incremental overestimation of disease-related conditions amongst the highest decile of risk probabilities. In summary, the risk prediction models described were validated with high discrimination and good calibration for several CVDs and DM2. These models incorporate multiple shared predictor variables and may be integrated into a single platform to enhance clinical stratification to impact health outcomes.

Project description:Unhealthy diet is a significant risk factor for cardiovascular diseases (CVD). Therefore, this umbrella review aims to comprehensively review the effects of dietary factors, including dietary patterns, food groups, and nutrients on CVD risks. Medline and Scopus databases were searched through March 2020. Systematic reviews with meta-analyses (SRMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies measuring the effects of dietary factors on CVD risks were eligible. Fifty-four SRMAs, including 35 SRMAs of observational studies, 10 SRMAs of RCTs, and 9 SRMAs of combined RCT and observational studies, were included for review. Findings from the SRMAs of RCTs suggest the significant benefit of Mediterranean and high-quality diets for lowering CVD risk, with pooled risk ratios (RRs) ranging from 0.55 (95%CI: 0.39-0.76) to 0.64 (95%CI: 0.53-0.79) and 0.70 (95%CI: 0.57-0.87), respectively. For food nutrients, two SRMAs of RCTs found that high intake of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) significantly reduced CVD risks, with pooled RRs ranging from 0.89 (95%CI: 0.82, 0.98) to 0.90 (95%CI: 0.85-0.96), while evidence of efficacy of n-6 PUFA and combined n-3 and n-6 PUFA were inconsistent. Moreover, results from the SRMAs of RCTs did not find a significant benefit of a low-salt diet and low total fat intake for CVD prevention. For food groups, results from the SRMAs of cohort studies suggest that high intakes of legumes, nuts, and chocolate, as well as a vegetarian diet significantly reduced the risk of coronary heart disease, with pooled RRs of 0.90 (95%CI: 0.84-0.97), 0.68 (95%CI: 0.59-0.78), 0.90 (95%CI: 0.82-0.97), and 0.71 (95%CI: 0.57-0.87), respectively. Healthy dietary patterns had a significant benefit for CVD prevention. With the substitutional and synergistic interactions between different food groups and nutrients, dietary recommendations for CVD prevention should be focused more on healthy dietary patterns than single food groups or nutrients.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Among individuals without hypertension based on clinic blood pressure (BP), it is unclear who should be screened for masked hypertension, defined as having hypertension based on out-of-clinic BP. We hypothesized that individuals with a higher 10-year predicted atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk, calculated using the pooled cohort risk equations, have a higher prevalence of masked hypertension. METHODS AND RESULTS:We analyzed data from the Jackson Heart Study-a population-based cohort of blacks-to determine the association of predicted ASCVD risk with masked hypertension. The sample included 644 participants, 40 to 79 years of age, with clinic systolic/diastolic BP <140/90 mm Hg, who completed ambulatory BP monitoring, were free of cardiovascular disease, and had data on factors needed to calculate ASCVD risk. Ten-year predicted ASCVD risk was calculated using the pooled cohort risk equations. Any masked hypertension was defined as masked daytime hypertension (mean daytime systolic/diastolic BP ?135/85 mm Hg), masked nighttime hypertension (mean nighttime systolic/diastolic BP ?120/70 mm Hg), or masked 24-hour hypertension (mean 24-hour systolic/diastolic BP ?130/80 mm Hg). The prevalence of any masked hypertension was 54.0%. Compared with participants in the lowest (<5%) predicted ASCVD risk category, multivariable-adjusted prevalence ratios (95% confidence interval) for any masked hypertension were 1.36 (1.03-1.79), 1.62 (1.22-2.16), and 1.91 (1.47-2.48) for those with ASCVD risk of 5% to <7.5%, 7.5% to <10%, and ?10%, respectively. The C statistic for discriminating between participants with versus without any masked hypertension was 0.681 (95% confidence interval, 0.640-0.723) for ASCVD risk and 0.703 (95% confidence interval, 0.663-0.744) for clinic systolic BP and diastolic BP. CONCLUSIONS:Higher ASCVD risk was associated with an increased prevalence of masked hypertension. Although the discrimination of ASCVD risk for masked hypertension was not superior to clinic BP, risk prediction equations may be useful for identifying the subgroup of individuals with both masked hypertension and high predicted ASCVD risk.

Dataset Information

Can risk be predicted? An umbrella systematic review of current risk prediction models for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and hypertension.

Objective

Design

Data sources

Eligibility criteria

Data extraction and synthesis

Study selection

Study appraisal

Risk of bias in individual studies

Results

Limitations

Conclusions

Prospero registration number

Publications

Can risk be predicted? An umbrella systematic review of current risk prediction models for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and hypertension.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure