↓ Skip to main content

Current and future cardiovascular disease risk assessment in the European Union: an international comparative study

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Public Health, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 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
Current and future cardiovascular disease risk assessment in the European Union: an international comparative study
Published in
European Journal of Public Health, January 2018
DOI 10.1093/eurpub/ckx216
Pubmed ID
Authors

Teresa J Mossakowska, Catherine L Saunders, Jennie Corbett, Calum MacLure, Eleanor M Winpenny, Elma Dujso, Rupert A Payne

Abstract

Risk assessment is central to primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD), but there remains a need to better understand the use of evidence-based interventions in practice. This study examines: (i) the policies and guidelines for risk assessment in Europe, (ii) the use of risk assessment tools in clinical practice and (iii) the barriers to, and facilitators of, risk assessment. Data were collected from academics, clinicians and policymakers in an online questionnaire targeted at experts from all European Union member states, and in 8 in-depth country case studies that were developed from a targeted literature review and 36 interviews. The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) produces European guidelines for CVD risk assessment and recommends the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation tool, which is the most widely used risk assessment tool in Europe. The use of risk assessment tools is variable. Lack of time and resources are important barriers. Integrating risk assessment tools into clinical systems and providing financial incentives to carry out risk assessments could increase implementation. Novel biomarkers would need to be supported by evidence of their clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to be introduced in clinical practice. These findings were consistent across Europe. Efforts to improve the assessment of CVD risk in clinical practice should be carried out by or in collaboration with, the ESC. Increasing the use of existing risk assessment tools is likely to offer greater gains in primary prevention than the development of novel biomarkers.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 24%
Unspecified 3 18%
Student > Master 2 12%
Professor 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Other 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 12%
Unspecified 2 12%
Computer Science 2 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 12%
Other 0 0%