External validation and comparison of six cardiovascular risk prediction models in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE)-Colombia study
Authors' conclusion
Six prediction models had a similar discrimination capacity, supporting their use after multiplying by a correction factor.
Study context
- Population
- Adults aged 40–69 years without baseline statin use or CVD, PURE-Colombia cohort, ≥10 years of follow-up59.1% women
- Participants
- 3,802 adults
- Comparison
- SCORE2 vs AHA/ACC pooled cohort equation (PCE) vs Framingham Risk Score (FRS) vs Non-Laboratory INTERHEART Risk Score (NL-IHRS) vs Globorisk-LAC vs WHO
- Outcome
- Discrimination (C-statistic)
- Follow-up
- Mean 13.2 years
Methodological detailsprospective cohort
- Prospective cohort
Performance
As reported in the abstract
NL-IHRS
0.637
C-statistic · CI 0.601–0.672
AHA/ACC PCE
0.767
C-statistic · CI 0.657–0.877
Further findings
| Outcome | Values |
|---|---|
| Calibration: over-prediction, womenHighest over-prediction in women | Globorisk-LAC 61% · WHO 59% |
| Calibration: over-prediction, menHighest over-prediction in men | FRS 72% · AHA/ACC PCE 71% |
| Baseline predicted risk | SCORE2 4.8% · NL-IHRS 55.7% |
- Baseline predicted risk: range lowest (SCORE2, women) to highest (NL-IHRS)
Calibration: over-prediction, men
- Overestimations corrected after multiplying by an integrated calibration index (ICI)-derived factor
Original publication
External validation and comparison of six cardiovascular risk prediction models in the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE)-Colombia study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Published 23 July 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →