Key result
The Framingham score and ACC/AHA calculator demonstrated moderate concordance (kappa 0.427, p<0.001) in estimating 10-year cardiovascular risk in geriatric patients, whereas SCORE2/SCORE-OP showed poor concordance.
Why the study?
Elderly patients are more likely to develop cardiovascular events, and risk stratification tools support prevention and eligibility assessment for statin use.
Cross-Sectional (n=124)
No
Effect estimate: kappa 0.427
p-value: p=<0.001
In geriatric patients, there is moderate concordance between the Framingham and ACC/AHA risk scores, but the SCORE2/SCORE-OP tools classify nearly all patients as high risk, highlighting the need for population-specific calibration.
Supports risk tool evaluation in geriatric outpatients; leaves open optimal selection pending outcome validation.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Colombo et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiovascular risk (n=124). Cardiovascular risk stratification tools was evaluated on Concordance between Framingham score and ACC/AHA calculator (kappa 0.427, p=<0.001). The Framingham score and ACC/AHA calculator demonstrated moderate concordance (kappa 0.427, p<0.001) in estimating 10-year cardiovascular risk in geriatric patients, whereas SCORE2/SCORE-OP showed poor concordance.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: