| Title: |
Can risk be predicted? An umbrella systematic review of current risk prediction models for cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and hypertension |
| Authors: |
Lucaroni F.; Cicciarella Modica D.; MacIno M.; Palombi L.; Abbondanzieri A.; Agosti G.; Biondi G.; Morciano L.; Vinci A. |
| Contributors: |
Lucaroni, F; Cicciarella Modica, D; Macino, M; Palombi, L; Abbondanzieri, A; Agosti, G; Biondi, G; Morciano, L; Vinci, A |
| Publication Year: |
2019 |
| Collection: |
Universitá degli Studi di Roma "Tor Vergata": ART - Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca |
| Subject Terms: |
cardiovascular disease; diabete; hypertension; risk prediction models; Settore MED/42 - IGIENE GENERALE E APPLICATA |
| Description: |
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 ... |
| Document Type: |
article in journal/newspaper |
| Language: |
English |
| Relation: |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/pmid/31862737; info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/wos/WOS:000512773400055; volume:9; issue:12; firstpage:e030234; journal:BMJ OPEN; https://hdl.handle.net/2108/232638 |
| DOI: |
10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030234 |
| Availability: |
https://hdl.handle.net/2108/232638; https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030234 |
| Rights: |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess ; license:Creative commons ; license uri:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/it/ |
| Accession Number: |
edsbas.7825F5A7 |
| Database: |
BASE |