Key result
Systematic review identifies 6 non-clinical CVD risk assessment tools for underserved young adults.
Why the study?
Existing non-clinically based tools for assessing CVD risk factors in underserved young adult (18-34-year-old) populations had not been critically appraised, compared, and summarized.
What non-clinically based tools exist for assessing cardiovascular disease risk factors in underserved young adult populations?
Systematic Review (n=67)
What non-clinically based tools exist for assessing cardiovascular disease risk factors in underserved young adult populations?
The review identified six non-clinical tools for assessing CVD risk in underserved young adults, highlighting options for risk assessment without laboratory data.
Provides lab-free CVD risk assessment options for underserved young adults; extends available tools for clinical screening and future validation studies.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD, i.e., disease of the heart and blood vessels) is a major cause of death globally. Current assessment tools use either clinical or non-clinical factors alone or in combination to assess CVD risk. The aim of this review was to critically appraise, compare, and summarize existing non-clinically based tools for assessing CVD risk factors in underserved young adult (18-34-year-old) populations. Two online electronic databases-PubMed and Scopus-were searched to identify existing risk assessment tools, using a combination of CVD-related keywords. The search was limited to articles available in English only and published between January 2008 and January 2019. Of the 10,383 studies initially identified, 67 were eligible. In total, 5 out of the 67 articles assessed CVD risk in underserved young adult populations. A total of 21 distinct CVD risk assessment tools were identified; six of these did not require clinical or laboratory data in their estimation (i.e., non-clinical). The main non-clinically based tools identified were the Heart Disease Fact Questionnaire, the Health Beliefs Related to CVD-Perception measure, the Healthy Eating Opinion Survey, the Perception of Risk of Heart Disease Scale, and the WHO STEPwise approach to chronic disease factor surveillance (i.e., the STEPS instrument).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Opoku‐Acheampong et al. (2021) conducted a systematic review in Cardiovascular disease risk factors (n=67). Non-clinically based CVD risk assessment tools was evaluated on Identification of existing non-clinically based tools for assessing CVD risk factors. A systematic review identified 21 distinct CVD risk assessment tools, including six non-clinical tools such as the Heart Disease Fact Questionnaire, for use in underserved young adult populations.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: