Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 683

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coronary Artery Calcification Compared With Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in the Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease Incidence<subtitle>The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)</subtitle>

Open access
Folsom, Aaron R.·2008·Archives of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery calcium (CAC) and carotid intima-media thickness (IMT) are noninvasive measures of atherosclerosis that consensus panels have recommended as possible additions to risk factor assessment for predicting the probability of cardiovascular disease (CVD) occurrence. Our objective was to assess whether maximum carotid IMT or CAC (Agatston score) is the better predictor of incident CVD. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of subjects aged 45 to 84 years in 4 ethnic groups, who were initially free of CVD (n = 6698) was performed, with standardized carotid IMT and CAC measures at baseline, in 6 field centers of the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). The main outcome measure was the risk of incident CVD events (coronary heart disease, stroke, and fatal CVD) over a maximum of 5.3 years of follow-up. RESULTS: There were 222 CVD events during follow-up. Coronary artery calcium was associated more strongly than carotid IMT with the risk of incident CVD. After adjustment for each other (CAC score and IMT) and age, race, and sex [corrected], the hazard ratio of CVD increased 2.1-fold (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-2.5) for each 1-standard deviation (SD) increment of log-transformed CAC score, vs 1.3-fold (95% CI, 1.1-1.4) for each 1-SD increment of the maximum IMT. For coronary heart disease, the hazard ratios per 1-SD increment increased 2.5-fold (95% CI, 2.1-3.1) for CAC score and 1.2-fold (95% CI, 1.0-1.4) for IMT. A receiver operating characteristic curve analysis also suggested that CAC score was a better predictor of incident CVD than was IMT, with areas under the curve of 0.81 vs 0.78, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although whether and how to clinically use bioimaging tests of subclinical atherosclerosis remains a topic of debate, this study found that CAC score is a better predictor of subsequent CVD events than carotid IMT.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinte.168.12.1333

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 683

Metadata

Authors
Folsom, A. R.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Published
2008-06-23
Volume
168
Issue
12
Pages
1333
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117913791
Cited by
683
References
3
FWCI
49.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Coronary Artery Calcification Compared With Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in the Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease Incidence<subtitle>The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)</subtitle>. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.168.12.1333
The paper
Folsom, A. R. (2008). Coronary Artery Calcification Compared With Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in the Prediction of Cardiovascular Disease Incidence<subtitle>The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA)</subtitle>. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.168.12.1333

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.