Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Response to Comment on the Reports of Over-estimation of ASCVD Risk Using the 2013 AHA/ACC Risk Equation

Response to Comment on the Reports of Over-estimation of ASCVD Risk Using the 2013 AHA/ACC... Special Corr Article T espondence ype for risk prediction in contemporary populations is an open issue Response to Comment on the Reports of Over- for discussion. estimation of ASCVD Risk Using the 2013 AHA/ The fourth point concerns the short-term nature of follow-up ACC Risk Equation in the REGARDS study, which could have led to instability of We appreciate the comments of Muntner et al regarding our con- the estimates. We look forward to the continuing follow-up in the 2 3 cern that the new atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk equation appears REGARDS cohort and expect that it will provide valuable informa- to overestimate risk in the 5 external validation cohorts examined to tion, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease rates among date (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis [MESA], REasons for African Americans. Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke [REGARDS], Women’s Other explanations for the discrepancies are also plausible. Health Study [WHS], Physicians’ Health Study [PHS], and Women’s Although the MESA, REGARDS, and WHI-OS studies were Health Initiative Observational Study [WHI-OS]). We concur that designed to be representative US population cohorts, the WHS and understanding how these validation cohorts differ from those used PHS were cohorts of health professionals and were part http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Circulation Wolters Kluwer Health

Response to Comment on the Reports of Over-estimation of ASCVD Risk Using the 2013 AHA/ACC Risk Equation

Ridker, Paul M
Circulation , Volume 129 (2) – Jan 1, 2014
Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters-kluwer-health/response-to-comment-on-the-reports-of-over-estimation-of-ascvd-risk-8RaaaLsLlF

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Copyright
© 2013 American Heart Association, Inc.
ISSN
0009-7322
eISSN
1524-4539
DOI
10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.007680
pmid
24334112
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Special Corr Article T espondence ype for risk prediction in contemporary populations is an open issue Response to Comment on the Reports of Over- for discussion. estimation of ASCVD Risk Using the 2013 AHA/ The fourth point concerns the short-term nature of follow-up ACC Risk Equation in the REGARDS study, which could have led to instability of We appreciate the comments of Muntner et al regarding our con- the estimates. We look forward to the continuing follow-up in the 2 3 cern that the new atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk equation appears REGARDS cohort and expect that it will provide valuable informa- to overestimate risk in the 5 external validation cohorts examined to tion, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease rates among date (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis [MESA], REasons for African Americans. Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke [REGARDS], Women’s Other explanations for the discrepancies are also plausible. Health Study [WHS], Physicians’ Health Study [PHS], and Women’s Although the MESA, REGARDS, and WHI-OS studies were Health Initiative Observational Study [WHI-OS]). We concur that designed to be representative US population cohorts, the WHS and understanding how these validation cohorts differ from those used PHS were cohorts of health professionals and were part

Journal

Circulation – Wolters Kluwer Health

Published: Jan 1, 2014

There are no references for this article.