TY - JOUR
T1 - Cardiovascular risk perception in women
T2 - True unawareness or risk miscalculation?
AU - Cainzos-Achirica, Miguel
AU - Blaha, Michael J.
N1 - Funding Information:
Miguel Cainzos-Achirica was funded by a research grant from the Spanish Society of Cardiology.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 Cainzos-Achirica and Blaha.
PY - 2015/5/11
Y1 - 2015/5/11
N2 - Assessing the 'accuracy' of cardiovascular risk perception is a worthy scientific goal that may lead to targeted interventions aimed at improving risk communication and health outcomes. Current cardiovascular risk scores, however, have shown poor calibration when used in populations that differ temporally and/or geographically from the derivation sample, limiting their reliability as the reference standard for absolute risk. In addition, accurately assessing risk awareness is challenging, with few available validated tools for effectively accounting for the outcomes assessed (coronary heart disease vs. cardiovascular disease), the time span of prediction (10-year vs. lifetime risk), and concepts of absolute versus relative risk. In this context, assessing patient awareness of the role of age as the key, non-modifiable driver of absolute risk can be particularly challenging. This commentary will examine each of these issues, providing context for the interpretation of studies on 'discordance' between calculated and perceived cardiovascular risk, such as the one recently published by Oertelt-Prigione et al. Moreover, we explore alternative approaches aimed at overcoming those limitations, enhancing understanding of the factors and true magnitude associated with such discordance.
AB - Assessing the 'accuracy' of cardiovascular risk perception is a worthy scientific goal that may lead to targeted interventions aimed at improving risk communication and health outcomes. Current cardiovascular risk scores, however, have shown poor calibration when used in populations that differ temporally and/or geographically from the derivation sample, limiting their reliability as the reference standard for absolute risk. In addition, accurately assessing risk awareness is challenging, with few available validated tools for effectively accounting for the outcomes assessed (coronary heart disease vs. cardiovascular disease), the time span of prediction (10-year vs. lifetime risk), and concepts of absolute versus relative risk. In this context, assessing patient awareness of the role of age as the key, non-modifiable driver of absolute risk can be particularly challenging. This commentary will examine each of these issues, providing context for the interpretation of studies on 'discordance' between calculated and perceived cardiovascular risk, such as the one recently published by Oertelt-Prigione et al. Moreover, we explore alternative approaches aimed at overcoming those limitations, enhancing understanding of the factors and true magnitude associated with such discordance.
KW - Awareness
KW - Cardiovascular disease
KW - Risk
KW - Risk assessment
KW - Risk communication
KW - Women
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84929168717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84929168717&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s12916-015-0351-2
DO - 10.1186/s12916-015-0351-2
M3 - Comment/debate
C2 - 25963396
AN - SCOPUS:84929168717
VL - 13
JO - BMC Medicine
JF - BMC Medicine
SN - 1741-7015
IS - 1
M1 - 112
ER -