Stepwise approach to screen high-risk individuals using the non-laboratory-based and laboratory-based CVD risk scoring
Résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: We compared non-laboratory models' efficacy with standard laboratory-based model in identifying high-risk populations for cardiovascular disease (CVD) in resource-limited settings. METHODS: A national sample of 121 672 individuals aged 40-70 from the PERSIAN cohort was analyzed. Non-laboratory models, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and Iranian pooled-cohort CVD mortality models, were compared with the WHO laboratory-based model. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) were utilized. Sensitivity and specificity of non-laboratory models were evaluated against the laboratory-based one at various risk thresholds. The number of reduced tests in the stepwise approach was calculated considering the Iranian census. RESULTS: Both non-laboratory and laboratory-based models showed similar trends in predicting CVD risks across age groups. Strong correlations and concordance were observed in both men (ICC: 94.4%, CCC:0.893) and women (ICC: 93.8%, CCC:0.883). Utilizing a 5% risk threshold for WHO non-laboratory and 2% for the Iranian pooled-cohort CVD mortality model as the initial step achieved high sensitivity (99.6%) and moderate specificity (52%) for identifying candidates for the second-step laboratory test. This approach effectively reduced the number of tests by 16 807 982. CONCLUSION: Non-laboratory models, in a stepwise approach, offer a promising strategy to alleviate strain on financial resources and enhance healthcare system efficiency in resource-limited countries.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Stepwise approach to screen high-risk individuals using the non-laboratory-based and laboratory-based CVD risk scoring
- Date Crossref
- 12/06/2025
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.