↓ Skip to main content

Accuracy of the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk Equation in a Large Contemporary, Multiethnic Population

Overview of attention for article published in JACC, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
94 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
policy
2 policy sources
twitter
98 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
230 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
216 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
Accuracy of the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk Equation in a Large Contemporary, Multiethnic Population
Published in
JACC, May 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.02.055
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jamal S. Rana, Grace H. Tabada, Matthew D. Solomon, Joan C. Lo, Marc G. Jaffe, Sue Hee Sung, Christie M. Ballantyne, Alan S. Go

Abstract

The accuracy of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort Risk Equation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events in contemporary and ethnically diverse populations is not well understood. The goal of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the 2013 ACC/AHA Pooled Cohort Risk Equation within a large, multiethnic population in clinical care. The target population for consideration of cholesterol-lowering therapy in a large, integrated health care delivery system population was identified in 2008 and followed up through 2013. The main analyses excluded those with known ASCVD, diabetes mellitus, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels <70 or ≥190 mg/dl, prior lipid-lowering therapy use, or incomplete 5-year follow-up. Patient characteristics were obtained from electronic medical records, and ASCVD events were ascertained by using validated algorithms for hospitalization databases and death certificates. We compared predicted versus observed 5-year ASCVD risk, overall and according to sex and race/ethnicity. We additionally examined predicted versus observed risk in patients with diabetes mellitus. Among 307,591 eligible adults without diabetes between 40 and 75 years of age, 22,283 were black, 52,917 were Asian/Pacific Islander, and 18,745 were Hispanic. We observed 2,061 ASCVD events during 1,515,142 person-years. In each 5-year predicted ASCVD risk category, observed 5-year ASCVD risk was substantially lower: 0.20% for predicted risk <2.50%; 0.65% for predicted risk 2.50% to <3.75%; 0.90% for predicted risk 3.75% to <5.00%; and 1.85% for predicted risk ≥5.00% (C statistic: 0.74). Similar ASCVD risk overestimation and poor calibration with moderate discrimination (C statistic: 0.68 to 0.74) were observed in sex, racial/ethnic, and socioeconomic status subgroups, and in sensitivity analyses among patients receiving statins for primary prevention. Calibration among 4,242 eligible adults with diabetes was improved, but discrimination was worse (C statistic: 0.64). In a large, contemporary "real-world" population, the ACC/AHA Pooled Cohort Risk Equation substantially overestimated actual 5-year risk in adults without diabetes, overall and across sociodemographic subgroups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 98 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 216 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 213 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 13%
Student > Master 24 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 9%
Student > Bachelor 16 7%
Other 52 24%
Unknown 54 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 91 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 5%
Computer Science 9 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 2%
Other 26 12%
Unknown 66 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 801. 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 04 September 2022.
All research outputs
#23,477
of 25,402,528 outputs
Outputs from JACC
#59
of 16,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#386
of 311,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JACC
#2
of 332 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,402,528 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 16,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 30.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 311,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 332 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.