Cross-sectional study estimates 10-year CVD risk in Jordan, highlighting smoking effects and biomarker relevance.
Background and Aims Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) are the leading cause of death in Jordan. This study aimed to estimate the prevalence of 10‐year CVD risk as predicted by the QRISK3 tool and assess fibrinogen levels and lipid profile parameters as additional indicators of CVD risk in a Jordanian sample. Methods This cross‐sectional study was conducted in Amman, Jordan. Eligible participants aged 25–64 years provided informed consent and completed a baseline questionnaire. Blood samples were collected for fibrinogen and lipid profile analyses. This study followed the STROBE guidelines for reporting observational studies. Results A total of 251 participants were recruited for this study. Among them, 78 (31.1%) had ≥ 10% QRISK3 score, and 36 (14.3%) had > 20% QRISK3 score. Active smokers had a higher prevalence of both ≥ 10% and > 20% QRISK3 scores compared to secondhand and never‐smokers ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.038, respectively). The prevalence of atrial fibrillation was higher in active smokers (20%) and secondhand smokers (25.4%) compared to never‐smokers (6.3%) ( p = 0.014). A total of 195 participants (77.7%) exhibited at least one non‐optimal lipid profile level. Smokers of more than 10 years showed a significantly higher prevalence of low HDL levels compared to those who had smoked for fewer years ( p = 0.034). Median fibrinogen levels were similar across smoking statuses (active smokers: 268 mg/dL, never‐smokers: 275 mg/dL, and secondhand smokers: 258 mg/dL, p = 0.456). Conclusion While the findings of this study cannot be generalized to the entire Jordanian population due to convenience sampling and the limited sample size, they highlight that a substantial proportion of participants are at elevated CVD risk. This underscores the importance of incorporating routine CVD risk screening into primary healthcare to identify high‐risk individuals and enable early preventive interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Salem et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: