TY - JOUR
T1 - Cardiovascular risk prediction models for women in the general population
T2 - A systematic review
AU - CREW Consortium
AU - Baart, Sara
AU - Dam, Veerle
AU - Scheres, Luuk J. J.
AU - Damen, Johanna A. A. G.
AU - Spijker, Rene
AU - Schuit, Ewoud
AU - Debray, Thomas P. A.
AU - Fauser, Bart C. J. M.
AU - Boersma, Eric
AU - Moons, Karel G. M.
AU - van der Schouw, Yvonne T.
AU - Appelman, Yolande
AU - Baart, Sara
AU - Benschop, Laura
AU - Boersma, Eric
AU - Brouwers, Laura
AU - Budde, Ricardo P. J.
AU - Cannegieter, Suzanne C.
AU - Dam, Veerle
AU - Eijkemans, Rene M. J. C.
AU - Fauser, Bart C. J. M.
AU - Ferrari, Michel D.
AU - Franx, Arie
AU - de Groot, Christianne J. M.
AU - Gunning, Marlise N.
AU - Hoek, Annemiek
AU - Koffijberg, Hendrik
AU - Koster, Maria P. H.
AU - Kruit, Mark C.
AU - Lagerweij, Ghizelda R.
AU - Lambalk, Cornelis B.
AU - Laven, Joop S. E.
AU - Linstra, Katie M.
AU - van der Lugt, Aad
AU - Maas, Angela H. E. M.
AU - van den Brink, Antoinette Maassen
AU - Meun, Cindy
AU - Middeldorp, Saskia
AU - Moons, Karel G. M.
AU - van Rijn, Bas B.
AU - van Lennep, Jeanine E. Roeters
AU - Roos-Hesselink, Jolien W.
AU - Scheres, Luuk J. J.
AU - van der Schouw, Yvonne T.
AU - Steegers, Eric A. P.
AU - Steegers-Theunissen, Regine P. M.
AU - Terwindt, Gisela M.
AU - Velthuis, Birgitta K.
AU - Wermer, Marieke J. H.
AU - Zoet, Gerbrand A.
PY - 2019/1/8
Y1 - 2019/1/8
N2 - AimTo provide a comprehensive overview of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models for women and models that include female-specific predictors.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of CVD risk prediction models for women in the general population by updating a previous review. We searched Medline and Embase up to July 2017 and included studies in which; (a) a new model was developed, (b) an existing model was validated, or (c) a predictor was added to an existing model.ResultsA total of 285 prediction models for women have been developed, of these 160 (56%) were female-specific models, in which a separate model was developed solely in women and 125 (44%) were sex-predictor models. Out of the 160 female-specific models, 2 (1.3%) included one or more female-specific predictors (mostly reproductive risk factors). A total of 591 validations of sex-predictor or female-specific models were identified in 206 papers. Of these, 333 (56%) validations concerned nine models (five versions of Framingham, SCORE, Pooled Cohort Equations and QRISK). The median and pooled C statistics were comparable for sex-predictor and female-specific models. In 260 articles the added value of new predictors to an existing model was described, however in only 3 of these female-specific that no competing interests exist. predictors (reproductive risk factors) were added.ConclusionsThere is an abundance of models for women in the general population. Female-specific and sex-predictor models have similar predictors and performance. Female-specific predictors are rarely included. Further research is needed to assess the added value of female-specific predictors to CVD models for women and provide physicians with a well-performing prediction model for women.
AB - AimTo provide a comprehensive overview of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction models for women and models that include female-specific predictors.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of CVD risk prediction models for women in the general population by updating a previous review. We searched Medline and Embase up to July 2017 and included studies in which; (a) a new model was developed, (b) an existing model was validated, or (c) a predictor was added to an existing model.ResultsA total of 285 prediction models for women have been developed, of these 160 (56%) were female-specific models, in which a separate model was developed solely in women and 125 (44%) were sex-predictor models. Out of the 160 female-specific models, 2 (1.3%) included one or more female-specific predictors (mostly reproductive risk factors). A total of 591 validations of sex-predictor or female-specific models were identified in 206 papers. Of these, 333 (56%) validations concerned nine models (five versions of Framingham, SCORE, Pooled Cohort Equations and QRISK). The median and pooled C statistics were comparable for sex-predictor and female-specific models. In 260 articles the added value of new predictors to an existing model was described, however in only 3 of these female-specific that no competing interests exist. predictors (reproductive risk factors) were added.ConclusionsThere is an abundance of models for women in the general population. Female-specific and sex-predictor models have similar predictors and performance. Female-specific predictors are rarely included. Further research is needed to assess the added value of female-specific predictors to CVD models for women and provide physicians with a well-performing prediction model for women.
KW - SEX-DIFFERENCES
KW - INDIVIDUAL PROGNOSIS
KW - DISEASE PREVENTION
KW - DIAGNOSIS TRIPOD
KW - GUIDELINES
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0210329
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0210329
M3 - Review article
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 14
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 1
M1 - 0210329
ER -