Key result
Cardiovascular disease risk prediction models showed acceptable discrimination (C-statistic 0.60-0.83) in the Chinese population, with the China-PAR model demonstrating good calibration (observed/expected ratio 0.99).
Why the study?
Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality with an increasing prevalence in China, making precise risk identification fundamental to promote primary prevention.
Meta-Analysis (n=22)
Several CVD risk prediction models exist for the Chinese population, with China-PAR showing good calibration, but most models require further external validation and tailoring to local settings.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports China-PAR for CVD risk prediction in Chinese adults; leaves open further external validation and local tailoring of other models.
BACKGROUND: There is an increasing prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in China, which represents the leading cause of mortality. Precise CVD risk identification is the fundamental prevention component. This study sought to systematically review the CVD risk prediction models derived and/or validated in the Chinese population to promote primary CVD prevention. METHODS: Reports were included if they derived or validated one or more CVD risk prediction models in the Chinese population. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP database, etc., were searched. The risk of bias was assessed with the Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). Meta-analysis was performed in R using the package metamisc. RESULTS: From 55,183 records, 22 studies were included. Twelve studies derived 18 CVD risk prediction models, of which seven models were derived based on a multicentre cohort including more than two provinces of mainland China, and one was a model developed based on a New Zealand cohort including Chinese individuals. The number of predictors ranged from 6 to 22. The definitions of predicted outcomes showed considerable heterogeneity. Fourteen articles described 29 validations of 8 models. The Framingham model and pooled cohort equations (PCEs) are the most frequently validated foreign tools. Discrimination was acceptable and similar for men and women among models (0.60-0.83). The calibration estimates changed substantially from one population to another. Prediction for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease Risk in China (China-PAR) showed good calibration [observed/expected events ratio = 0.99, 95% PI (0.57,1.70)] and female sex [1.10, 95% PI (0.23,5.16)]. CONCLUSIONS: Several models have been developed or validated in the Chinese population. The usefulness of most of the models remains unclear due to incomplete external validation and head-to-head comparison. Future research should focus on externally validating or tailoring these models to local settings. TRAIL REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered at PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, CRD42021277453).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Guo et al. (2022) conducted a meta-analysis in Cardiovascular disease (n=22). Cardiovascular disease risk prediction models was evaluated on Model discrimination (C-statistic) and calibration (observed/expected events ratio). Cardiovascular disease risk prediction models showed acceptable discrimination (C-statistic 0.60-0.83) in the Chinese population, with the China-PAR model demonstrating good calibration (observed/expected ratio 0.99).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: