ArticlePharmacoEconomics2026
External Validation of SELECT Trial-Derived Cardiovascular Risk Equations in a UK Population with Overweight or Obesity and Established Cardiovascular Disease Without Diabetes.
Article in PharmacoEconomics, 2026. 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHealth economic models, many of which rely on risk equations, often play an important role in informing local healthcare decision making for the management of obesity. Risk equations for predicting cardiovascular outcomes have previously been derived from SELECT trial data. Validation of risk equations in real-world populations can provide confidence in the accuracy and reliability of health economic models.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to validate the predicted outcomes of the novel, SELECT trial-derived cardiovascular risk equations in a real-world UK population with overweight or obesity and established CVD without diabetes using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database.
methodsThe SELECT risk equations for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and stroke were externally validated in a CPRD cohort; records were assessed between 24 October 2008 and 29 March 2021 for patients aged ≥ 45 years with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27 kg/m
resultsThe discrimination C-indices at 4 years were 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.65) for ACS and 0.71 (95% CI 0.71-0.71) for stroke. After re-calibration, at 4 years calibration, observed/expected ratio was 1.02 (95% CI 1.00-1.03) for ACS and 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-1.00) for stroke. Prediction accuracy was lower for those with a higher baseline risk of stroke, with over-prediction observed in these patients. For both ACS and stroke, the SELECT risk equations showed better discrimination than Framingham (ACS) (C-index 0.68 vs 0.54) and SMART-REACH (stroke) (C-index 0.74 vs 0.50).
conclusionThe recalibrated SELECT risk equations showed acceptable discrimination and good calibration when applied to a real-world population of patients with overweight or obesity and established CVD without diabetes from the CPRD database. These risk equations with calibration also demonstrated better predictive performance compared with published risk equations, supporting their use in health economic evaluations in this patient population.
Identifiers
42547763What 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.