Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 415

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Improvements in risk stratification for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease by imaging subclinical atherosclerosis: a systematic review

Open access
Peters, Sanne A E, den Ruijter, Hester M, Bots, Michiel L, Moons, Karel G M·2012·Heart

Abstract

Context: Imaging for subclinical atherosclerosis on top of conventional risk factor assessment may improve risk prediction for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease events in asymptomatic individuals. Objective: To systematically review the available evidence on this issue. Data Sources: PubMed MEDLINE was systematically searched on 7 September 2011. Study selection: Studies were included that evaluated the added value of flow mediated dilation (FMD), carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), carotid plaques and/or coronary artery calcification (CAC) scoring in the prediction of risk for developing fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular events. Data extraction: Data on general study characteristics and the added predictive performance of imaging markers in terms of discrimination, calibration and (re)classification were extracted. Results: 25 studies were selected that provided information on added predictive value of FMD (n=2), CIMT (n=12), carotid plaques (n=6) and/or CAC (n=9). Heterogeneity existed across studies in the conventional risk models that were used and in the measurements of the imaging marker. The added predictive value, quantified by the difference in c-index, of FMD, CIMT, carotid plaques or CAC ranged from 0.00 to 0.01 for FMD, from 0.00 to 0.03 for CIMT, from 0.01 to 0.05 for carotid plaque and from 0.05 to 0.13 for CAC. The reported net reclassification improvement (NRI) by the imaging markers ranged from −1.4% to 12% for CIMT, 8% to 11% for carotid plaques, 14% to 25% for CAC and 29% for FMD). Although the definition of intermediate cardiovascular risk varied across studies, the NRI was the highest in those at intermediate cardiovascular risk. Conclusions: Published evidence on the added value of atherosclerosis imaging varies across the different markers, with limited evidence for FMD and considerable evidence for CIMT, carotid plaque and CAC. The added predictive value of additional screening may be primarily found in asymptomatic individuals at intermediate cardiovascular risk. Additional research in asymptomatic individuals is needed to quantify the cost effectiveness and impact of imaging for subclinical atherosclerosis on cardiovascular risk factor management and patient outcomes.

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 · 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300747

Cites

10 of 10 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 10 references

Cited by

See all 415

Metadata

Authors
Peters, S. A. E., den Ruijter, H. M., Bots, M. L., & Moons, K. G. M.
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2011-11-17
Volume
98
Issue
3
Pages
177-184
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W2157894862
Cited by
415
References
10
FWCI
5.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Improvements in risk stratification for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease by imaging subclinical atherosclerosis: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300747
The paper
Peters, S. A. E., den Ruijter, H. M., Bots, M. L., & Moons, K. G. M. (2012). Improvements in risk stratification for the occurrence of cardiovascular disease by imaging subclinical atherosclerosis: a systematic review. Heart. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2011-300747

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.