Key result
The new Australian CVD risk calculator could overestimate risk category compared with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine and underestimate it compared with the Swedish/Scottish prediction tool in T1DM.
Why the study?
Does the new Australian CVD risk calculator accurately stratify CVD risk compared to T1DM-specific tools in individuals with type 1 diabetes?
Does the new Australian CVD risk calculator accurately stratify CVD risk compared to T1DM-specific tools in individuals with type 1 diabetes?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The new Australian CVD risk calculator may not accurately stratify CVD risk in individuals with type 1 diabetes compared to T1DM-specific tools, highlighting the need for a tailored assessment pathway.
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a significant burden in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Yet the optimal method of CVD risk stratification remains uncertain. We found that the new Australian CVD risk calculator could overestimate risk category compared with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine and underestimate risk category compared with the new Swedish/Scottish prediction tool, both of which were validated for T1DM. More research is needed to derive a CVD risk assessment pathway for individuals with T1DM in Australia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Goh et al. (2024) studied type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). new Australian CVD risk calculator vs. Steno Type 1 Risk Engine and new Swedish/Scottish prediction tool was evaluated on CVD risk category. The new Australian CVD risk calculator could overestimate risk category compared with the Steno Type 1 Risk Engine and underestimate it compared with the Swedish/Scottish prediction tool in T1DM.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: