The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Coronary Artery Calcium Score Combined With Framingham Score for Risk Prediction in Asymptomatic Individuals
Abstract
CONTEXT: Guidelines advise that all adults undergo coronary heart disease (CHD) risk assessment to guide preventive treatment intensity. Although the Framingham Risk Score (FRS) is often recommended for this, it has been suggested that risk assessment may be improved by additional tests such as coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS). OBJECTIVES: To determine whether CACS assessment combined with FRS in asymptomatic adults provides prognostic information superior to either method alone and whether the combined approach can more accurately guide primary preventive strategies in patients with CHD risk factors. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational population-based study, of 1461 asymptomatic adults with coronary risk factors. Participants with at least 1 coronary risk factor (>45 years) underwent computed tomography (CT) examination, were screened between 1990-1992, were contacted yearly for up to 8.5 years after CT scan, and were assessed for CHD. This analysis included 1312 participants with CACS results; excluded were 269 participants with diabetes and 14 participants with either missing data or had a coronary event before CACS was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or CHD death. RESULTS: During a median of 7.0 years of follow-up, 84 patients experienced MI or CHD death; 70 patients died of any cause. There were 291 (28%) participants with an FRS of more than 20% and 221 (21%) with a CACS of more than 300. Compared with an FRS of less than 10%, an FRS of more than 20% predicted the risk of MI or CHD death (hazard ratio [HR], 14.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]; 2.0-104; P =.009). Compared with a CACS of zero, a CACS of more than 300 was predictive (HR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.1-7.3; P<.001). Across categories of FRS, CACS was predictive of risk among patients with an FRS higher than 10% (P<.001) but not with an FRS less than 10%. CONCLUSION: These data support the hypothesis that high CACS can modify predicted risk obtained from FRS alone, especially among patients in the intermediate-risk category in whom clinical decision making is most uncertain.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Prediction of coronary heart disease using risk factor categories
Wilson, P. W. F., D’Agostino, R. B., Levy, D., Belanger, A. M., Silbershatz, H., & Kannel, W. B. (1998) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.97.18.1837 · Cited by 9,581
Quantification of coronary artery calcium using ultrafast computed tomography
Agatston, A. S., Janowitz, W. R., Hildner, F. J., Zusmer, N. R., Viamonte, M., & Detrano, R. (1990) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/0735-1097(90)90282-t · Cited by 7,786
Prediction of coronary events with electron beam computed tomography
Arad, Y., Spadaro, L. A., Goodman, K., Newstein, D., & Guerci, A. D. (2000) · Journal of the American College of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/s0735-1097(00)00872-x · Cited by 744 · cited 7×
“In4previouslypublishedreports, average follow-up was less than 4 years, and definite coronary events were often few.(10-13) Earlier reports also typically included revascularizations among the coronaryeventscountedtoincreasestudy power.”
BackgroundMethodResultInfluential
Cited by
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Benjamin, E. J., Blaha, M. J., Chiuve, S. E., Cushman, M., Das, S. R., Deo, R., de Ferranti, S. D., Floyd, J., Fornage, M., Gillespie, C., et al. (2017) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000485 · Cited by 12,591
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2012 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Writing Group Members, Roger, V. L., Go, A. S., Lloyd-Jones, D. M., Benjamin, E. J., Berry, J. D., Borden, W. B., Bravata, D. M., Dai, S., Ford, E. S., et al. (2012) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31823ac046 · Cited by 7,333
Heart disease and stroke statistics-2018 update: a report from the american heart association
Benjamin, E. J., Virani, S. S., Callaway, C. W., Chamberlain, A. M., Chang, A. R., Cheng, S., Chiuve, S. E., Cushman, M., Delling, F. N., Deo, R., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000558 · Cited by 7,146
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Mozaffarian, D., Benjamin, E. J., Go, A. S., Arnett, D. K., Blaha, M. J., Cushman, M., Das, S. R., de Ferranti, S., Després, J.-P., Fullerton, H. J., et al. (2016) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000350 · Cited by 6,596
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2011 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Roger, V. L., Go, A. S., Lloyd-Jones, D. M., Adams, R. J., Berry, J. D., Brown, T. M., Carnethon, M. R., Dai, S., de Simone, G., Ford, E. S., et al. (2011) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e3182009701 · Cited by 6,149
Metadata
- Authors
- Greenland, P.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2004-01-14
- Volume
- 291
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 210
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2105766576
- Cited by
- 1,829
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 90.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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 Calcium Score Combined With Framingham Score for Risk Prediction in Asymptomatic Individuals. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.291.2.210
- The paper
- Greenland, P. (2004). Coronary Artery Calcium Score Combined With Framingham Score for Risk Prediction in Asymptomatic Individuals. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.2.210
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.