Key result
The QRISK2 score produced lower overall median estimates of cardiovascular disease risk than the JBS2 algorithm (6.6% vs 9.3%), designating 19.1% fewer South Asian men at high risk.
Why the study?
Does the QRISK2 score produce different estimates of cardiovascular risk compared to the JBS2 algorithm across ethnic groups?
Population
Individuals from the Health Survey for England, including South Asian and White men and women
Comparison
QRISK2 score vs Joint British Societies 2 algorithm
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
QRISK2 yields lower risk estimates than JBS2 in South Asian men; leaves open which tool better predicts events and reduces inequalities.
Cross-Sectional
Yes
Does the QRISK2 score produce different estimates of cardiovascular risk compared to the JBS2 algorithm across ethnic groups?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.6% vs 9.3%
Current CVD risk scoring tools used in the UK produce significantly different estimates of risk within ethnic groups, particularly in South Asian men, highlighting the need for accurate risk estimation to address health inequalities.
Dalton et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiovascular disease. QRISK2 algorithm vs. Joint British Societies 2 (JBS2) algorithm was evaluated on Median estimates of CVD risk. The QRISK2 score produced lower overall median estimates of cardiovascular disease risk than the JBS2 algorithm (6.6% vs 9.3%), designating 19.1% fewer South Asian men at high risk.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: