Why the study?
Does non-laboratory-based CVD risk assessment improve cost-effectiveness compared to laboratory-based assessment in adults without history of CVD?
Does non-laboratory-based CVD risk assessment improve cost-effectiveness compared to laboratory-based assessment in adults without history of CVD?
Non-laboratory-based CVD risk assessment, either alone or as the initial step in a multistage approach, is a cost-effective alternative to universal laboratory-based screening.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pandya et al. (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: