↓ Skip to main content

Validation of a new predictive risk model: measuring the impact of the major modifiable risks of death for patients and populations

Overview of attention for article published in Population Health Metrics, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Validation of a new predictive risk model: measuring the impact of the major modifiable risks of death for patients and populations
Published in
Population Health Metrics, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12963-015-0059-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephen S. Lim, Emily Carnahan, Eugene C. Nelson, Catherine W. Gillespie, Ali H. Mokdad, Christopher J. L. Murray, Elliott S. Fisher

Abstract

Modifiable risks account for a large fraction of disease and death, but clinicians and patients lack tools to identify high risk populations or compare the possible benefit of different interventions. We used data on the distribution of exposure to 12 major behavioral and biometric risk factors inthe US population, mortality rates by cause, and estimates of the proportional hazards of risk factor exposure from published systematic reviews to develop a risk prediction model that estimates an adult's 10 year mortality risk compared to a population with optimum risk factors. We compared predicted risk to observed mortality in 8,241 respondents in NHANES 1988-1994 and NHANES 1999-2004 with linked mortality data up to the end of 2006. Predicted risk showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of 0.84 (standard error 0.01) for women and 0.84 (SE 0.01) for men. Across deciles of predicted risk, mortality was accurately predicted in men ((Χ (2) statistic = 12.3 for men, p=0.196) but slightly overpredicted in the highest decile among women (Χ (2) statistic = 22.8, p=0.002). Mortality risk was highly concentrated; for example, among those age 30-44 years, 5.1 % (95 % CI 4.1 % - 6.0 %) of the male and 5.9 % (95 % CI 4.8 % - 6.9 %) of the female population accounted for 25 % of the risk of death. The risk model accurately predicted mortality in a representative sample of the US population and could be used to help inform patient and provider decision-making, identify high risk groups, and monitor the impact of efforts to improve population health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Student > Master 6 11%
Other 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 13 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Computer Science 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 16 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2016.
All research outputs
#5,685,099
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Population Health Metrics
#160
of 392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,723
of 274,923 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Population Health Metrics
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 274,923 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.