The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 66 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Cardiovascular risk assessment scores for people with diabetes: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
People with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Multivariate cardiovascular risk scores have been used in many countries to identify individuals who are at high risk of CVD. These risk scores include those originally developed in individuals with diabetes and those developed in a general population. This article reviews the published evidence for the performance of CVD risk scores in diabetic patients by: (1) examining the overall rationale for using risk scores; (2) systematically reviewing the literature on available scores; and (3) exploring methodological issues surrounding the development, validation and comparison of risk scores. The predictive performance of cardiovascular risk scores varies substantially between different populations. There is little evidence to suggest that risk scores developed in individuals with diabetes estimate cardiovascular risk more accurately than those developed in the general population. The inconsistency in the methods used in evaluation studies makes it difficult to compare and summarise the predictive ability of risk scores. Overall, CVD risk scores rank individuals reasonably accurately and are therefore useful in the management of diabetes with regard to targeting therapy to patients at highest risk. However, due to the uncertainty in estimation of true risk, care is needed when using scores to communicate absolute CVD risk to individuals.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Risk estimator tools, especially for CVD risk, may also be helpful, but when using these tools one must be aware that they work best when they are derived from and/or are validated in a population similar to the population in which they are applied (307).”
From Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) (2022) · cites this paper as [307]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
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
Haffner, S. M., Lehto, S., Rönnemaa, T., Pyörälä, K., & Laakso, M. (1998) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199807233390404 · Cited by 7,000
Pencina, M. J., D' Agostino, R. B., D' Agostino, R. B., & Vasan, R. S. (2008) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.2929 · Cited by 6,493
Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal cardiovascular disease in Europe: the SCORE project
Conroy, R. (2003) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/s0195-668x(03)00114-3 · Cited by 5,290
Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes
Gæde, P., Vedel, P., Larsen, N., Jensen, G. V. H., Parving, H.-H., & Pedersen, O. (2003) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa021778 · Cited by 4,378
Colhoun, H. M., Betteridge, D. J., Durrington, P. N., Hitman, G. A., W Neil, H. A., Livingstone, S. J., Thomason, M. J., Mackness, M. I., Charlton-Menys, V., & Fuller, J. H. (2004) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(04)16895-5 · Cited by 3,755
Effect of a multifactorial intervention on mortality in type 2 diabetes
Gæde, P., Lund-Andersen, H., Parving, H.-H., & Pedersen, O. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa0706245 · Cited by 3,465 · cited 1×
“Type 2 diabetes is a strong risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), with some studies suggesting that it confers an equivalent risk to having had a myocardial infarction [1, 2]. Multifactorial interventions, such as the Steno-2 study, have been effective in reducing the risk of non-fatal [3] and fatal CVD [ 4 ]…”
BackgroundCardiovascular disease risk profiles
Anderson, K. M., Odell, P. M., Wilson, P. W. F., & Kannel, W. B. (1991) · American Heart Journal · doi:10.1016/0002-8703(91)90861-b · Cited by 2,163
Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction
Cook, N. R. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.106.672402 · Cited by 2,156
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Davies, M. J., Aroda, V. R., Collins, B. S., Gabbay, R. A., Green, J., Maruthur, N. M., Rosas, S. E., Del Prato, S., Mathieu, C., Mingrone, G., et al. (2022) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dci22-0034 · Cited by 2,104
Authors Task Force Members, Rydén, L., Grant, P. J., Anker, S. D., Berne, C., Cosentino, F., Danchin, N., Deaton, C., Escaned, J., Hammes, H., et al. (2013) · European Heart Journal · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/eht108 · Cited by 1,994
Davies, M. J., Aroda, V. R., Collins, B. S., Gabbay, R. A., Green, J., Maruthur, N. M., Rosas, S. E., Del Prato, S., Mathieu, C., Mingrone, G., et al. (2022) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/s00125-022-05787-2 · Cited by 1,048
Rydén, L., Grant, P. J., Anker, S. D., Berne, C., Cosentino, F., Danchin, N., Deaton, C., Escaned, J., Hammes, H., Huikuri, H., et al. (2014) · Revista Española de Cardiología (English Edition) · doi:10.1016/j.rec.2013.10.013 · Cited by 609
Risk assessment tools for identifying individuals at risk of developing type 2 diabetes
Buijsse, B., Simmons, R. K., Griffin, S. J., & Schulze, M. B. (2011) · Epidemiologic Reviews · doi:10.1093/epirev/mxq019 · Cited by 297
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Chamnan, P., Simmons, R. K., Sharp, S. J., Griffin, S. J., & Wareham, N. J.
- Affiliations
- Addenbrooke's Hospital (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Wareham, N. J.
- Venue
- Diabetologia
- Published
- 2009-07-24
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 2001-2014
- ISSN
- 0012-186X (ISSN-L)
- 1432-0428
- PMC
- PMC2744770
- OpenAlex
- W1969752830
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 66
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc
- Locations
- Diabetologia (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Cambridge
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- cardiovascular risk score, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular risk, risk prediction, risk score validation, risk score comparison, predictive performance, risk communication, diabetes management
- MeSH terms
- Cardiovascular Diseases, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Humans, Risk Factors, Risk Assessment
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
