↓ Skip to main content

Can cardiovascular disease guidelines that advise treatment decisions based on absolute risk be improved?

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Can cardiovascular disease guidelines that advise treatment decisions based on absolute risk be improved?
Published in
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12872-016-0396-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Duncan J. Campbell

Abstract

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) will remain the predominant cause of death and a major cause of morbidity for the foreseeable future. Consequently, CVD prevention offers the greatest potential for the prevention of premature mortality and the compression of morbidity. The 2013 guidelines of the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association expand the eligibility for CVD preventive treatment based on the calculated 10-year CVD risk derived from the pooled cohort equation to all persons who have a 10-year risk of CVD of ≥7.5% as estimated by the pooled cohort equation. Previous analyses show that the use of a uniform 10-year risk threshold of 7.5% for all ages disadvantages younger individuals for whom preventive therapy has most to offer. Here I show that reducing the threshold to 3% in younger adults (women aged <66 years and men aged <56 years) will substantially increase the number of cardiovascular events prevented at a similar number needed to treat to prevent one event. Importantly, this increase in cardiovascular event prevention will occur in individuals with greater life expectancy. Reducing the threshold 10-year risk of CVD derived from the pooled cohort equation for CVD preventive treatment to 3% in younger adults (women aged <66 years and men aged <56 years) will more effectively prevent premature mortality and compress morbidity to an older age.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 21%
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Postgraduate 2 14%
Student > Master 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 36%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Unknown 6 43%