Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 589

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Primary and subsequent coronary risk appraisal: New results from the Framingham study

Open access
D'Agostino, Ralph B, Russell, Mason W, Huse, Daniel M, Ellison, R.Curtis, Silbershatz, Halit, Wilson, Peter W.F, Hartz, Stuart C·2000·American Heart Journal

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease continues to be one of the most common chronic illnesses in the United States and most of the developed world. Clinicians and health authorities have interest in identifying individuals at increased risk of CHD. The Framingham Heart Study has over the years produced mathematical "health risk appraisal models" that relate risk factors to the probability of developing CHD. METHODS AND RESULTS: New sex-specific models from The Framingham Heart Study for primary and secondary (subsequent) CHD have been produced. The primary CHD models are appropriate for assessing CHD risk in persons free of cardiovascular disease and contain risk factors such as triglyceride levels, alcohol use, and menopausal status, risk factors not included in previously published models. The subsequent CHD models are applicable for persons with a history of CHD or ischemic stroke who have survived the acute period after the event. Age, blood lipid levels (total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol), and diabetes status are significant for men and women. In addition, systolic blood pressure and cigarette smoking are significant predictors of subsequent CHD in women. CONCLUSIONS: These new models are useful tools for better understanding the relation between risk factors and the occurrences of CHD events in individuals who are free of cardiovascular disease as well as persons who have had a prior CHD event or stroke. With the development of these latter models, the importance of blood lipid levels, diabetes, and, in women, systolic blood pressure and cigarette smoking as independent predictors of risk is once again underscored.

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 · 10.1016/s0002-8703(00)90236-9

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 589

Metadata

Authors
D'Agostino, R. B., Russell, M. W., Huse, D. M., Ellison, R. C., Silbershatz, H., Wilson, P. W. F., & Hartz, S. C.
Venue
American Heart Journal
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-02
Volume
139
Issue
2
Pages
272-281
ISSN
0002-8703 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2064303441
Cited by
589
References
4
FWCI
14.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Primary and subsequent coronary risk appraisal: New results from the Framingham study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0002-8703(00)90236-9
The paper
D'Agostino, R. B., Russell, M. W., Huse, D. M., Ellison, R. C., Silbershatz, H., Wilson, P. W. F., & Hartz, S. C. (2000). Primary and subsequent coronary risk appraisal: New results from the Framingham study. American Heart Journal. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-8703(00)90236-9

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.