Key result
QRISK was found to be the most accurate cardiovascular disease risk calculator across several study populations, whereas the WHO/ISH risk scores were the least accurate.
Why the study?
Various guidelines recommend different algorithms for CVD risk prediction, but evidence on key features, usability, and benefits of digital CVD risk calculators for prevention and management is summarized in this review.
Are CVD risk calculators using digital platforms beneficial for CVD prevention and management?
Are CVD risk calculators using digital platforms beneficial for CVD prevention and management?
Digital CVD risk calculators vary in accuracy, with QRISK being more accurate than WHO/ISH scores, emphasizing the need for locally validated and user-friendly tools.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Digital CVD risk calculators on digital platforms may aid prevention; leaves open optimal design and clinical integration pending further trials.
Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are the leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. This review aimed to summarise evidence on the key features, usability and benefits of CVD risk calculators using digital platforms for CVDs prevention and management in populations. Method and analysis: We conducted a scoping review using a few search engines and thematic analysis. We used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) as the reporting guideline for this review. The review found that various guidelines are recommending different algorithms for CVD risk prediction. The QRISK® was the more accurate CVD risk calculator for several study populations, whereas World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension risk scores were the least accurate. The key features of CVD risk calculators are variables, predictive accuracy, discrimination index, applicability, understandability, and cost-effectiveness. Ethics and dissemination: As this study will be based only on published studies, ethics approval is not obtained. A development and validation study must be conducted for the selected risk prediction tool, which considers a combination of stroke-specific risk with CVD risk to determine its usability to the local population and benefits to the respective health care setting. Overall, each healthcare setting should utilize a more feasible, accurate and user-friendly online CVD risk assessment tool designed based on the characteristics of the population and health system to enhance healthcare professionals’ roles in the prevention and management of CVDs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Badawy et al. (2022) conducted a review in Cardiovascular disease risk assessment (n=17). Digital CVD risk calculators (e.g., QRISK, WHO/ISH) vs. Other risk calculators was evaluated on Predictive accuracy, usability, and benefits of CVD risk calculators. QRISK was found to be the most accurate cardiovascular disease risk calculator across several study populations, whereas the WHO/ISH risk scores were the least accurate.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: