ArticleArquivos brasileiros de cardiologia2025
Agreement between Framingham, Pooled Cohort Equations, and Globorisk-LAC in the Estimation of Cardiovascular Risk in Brazil, 2013.
Article in Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Framingham risk score and Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE) have never been recalibrated for the Brazilian population. In contrast, the Globorisk-LAC score was recently derived using a methodology analogous to the PCE and has been recalibrated for Latin American countries.
objectivesTo describe the agreement between the Framingham, PCE, and Globorisk-LAC scores in estimating the 10-year cardiovascular risk in the Brazilian population.
methodsThis cross-sectional study used the three scores to estimate cardiovascular risk in participants aged 40 to 74 years without a history of cardiovascular disease based on data from the 2013 National Health Survey (PNS). The agreement was estimated as (i) the percentage of participants in which the risk estimated by one score was between 0.80 and 1.25 times the risk estimated by another score and (ii) based on the Gwet's agreement coefficient (AC1) according to risk categories (low, intermediate, and high).
resultsA total of 4,416 participants were included from 8,952 participants from the PNS with a laboratory component. The median (interquartile range) of the estimated 10-year cardiovascular risk was 9.2% (5.1 to 17.8) according to the Framingham, 3.6% (1.7 to 8.2) according to the PCE, and 4.7% (2.8 to 8.1) according to the Globorisk-LAC. The risk estimated using the Framingham agreed with the Globorisk-LAC and PCE in 6.4% and 1.8% of the cases, respectively, whereas the PCE and Globorisk-LAC agreed in 34.7% of the cases. When considering the risk stratification, the respective AC1 values were 0.454, 0.489, and 0.874.
conclusionsThe three cardiovascular risk scores showed low levels of agreement with each other. The reasons for this disagreement suggests that Globorisk-LAC is a strong candidate to replace the Framingham in the Brazilian guidelines for dyslipidemia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.