Cited by 130Health Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors

Ethnicity and prediction of cardiovascular disease: performance of QRISK2 and Framingham scores in a UK tri-ethnic prospective cohort study (SABRE—Southall And Brent REvisited)

Open access
Tillin, Therese, Hughes, Alun D, Whincup, Peter, Mayet, Jamil, Sattar, Naveed, McKeigue, Paul M, Chaturvedi, Nish, On behalf of the SABRE Study Group·2014·Heart

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate QRISK2 and Framingham cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk scores in a tri-ethnic UK population. Design: Cohort study. Setting: West London. Participants: Randomly selected from primary care lists. Follow-up data were available for 87% of traced participants, comprising 1866 white Europeans, 1377 South Asians, and 578 African Caribbeans, aged 40–69 years at baseline (1998–1991). Main outcome measures: First CVD events: myocardial infarction, coronary revascularisation, angina, transient ischaemic attack or stroke reported by participant, primary care or hospital records or death certificate. Results: During follow-up, 387 CVD events occurred in men (14%) and 78 in women (8%). Both scores underestimated risk in European and South Asian women (ratio of predicted to observed risk: European women: QRISK2: 0.73, Framingham: 0.73; South Asian women: QRISK2: 0.52, Framingham: 0.43). In African Caribbeans, Framingham over-predicted in men and women and QRISK2 over-predicted in women. Framingham classified 28% of participants as high risk, predicting 54% of all such events. QRISK2 classified 19% as high risk, predicting 42% of all such events. Both scores performed poorly in identifying high risk African Caribbeans; QRISK2 and Framingham identified as high risk only 10% and 24% of those who experienced events. Conclusions: Neither score performed consistently well in all ethnic groups. Further validation of QRISK2 in other multi-ethnic datasets, and better methods for identifying high risk African Caribbeans and South Asian women, are required.

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-2013-304474

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Sampling bias was a well-known issue with the Framingham Heart Study, which drew its study population from the racially homogeneous town of Framingham, Massachusetts, and consequently can lead to both over- and under-treatment of certain ethnic minorities.

    “Sampling bias was a well-known issue with the highly influential Framingham Heart Study, which drew its study population from the racially homogeneous town of Framingham, Massachusetts—and consequently can lead to both over- and under-treatment of certain ethnic minorities25,26.”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tillin, T., Hughes, A. D., Whincup, P., Mayet, J., Sattar, N., McKeigue, P. M., Chaturvedi, N., & On behalf of the SABRE Study Group
Affiliations
  • Imperial College London (GB)
  • St George's, University of London (GB)
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Tillin, Therese
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-11-01
Volume
100
Issue
1
Pages
60-67
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W2131603728
Cited by
130
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
12.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Heart (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • University of Washington
  • Wellcome Trust (082464, 082464/Z/07/Z)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (NF-SI-0611-10219)
  • British Heart Foundation (SP/07/001/23603)
  • Diabetes UK
  • University of Exeter
  • Imperial College London
  • University of Oxford
  • University of Glasgow
  • Medical Research Council (MC_UU_12015/5)
  • Menzies Centre for Australian Studies, King's College London, University of London
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Keywords
cardiovascular risk prediction, QRISK2, Framingham risk score, ethnic differences, South Asian women, Afro-Caribbean population, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, risk score validation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cardiovascular Diseases, Diagnostic Imaging, Ethnicity, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Forecasting, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Morbidity, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Sex Factors, Survival Rate, 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