Cited by 1,234Health Promotion and Cardiovascular PreventionCardiovascular Health and Risk FactorsLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health

Development and validation of the American Heart Association’s PREVENT equations

Open access
Khan, Sadiya S., Matsushita, Kunihiro, Sang, Yingying, Ballew, Shoshana H., Grams, Morgan E., Surapaneni, Aditya, Blaha, Michael J., Carson, April P. +20 more·2024·Circulation

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Multivariable equations are recommended by primary prevention guidelines to assess absolute risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, current equations have several limitations. Therefore, we developed and validated the American Heart Association Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) equations among US adults 30 to 79 years of age without known CVD. METHODS: The derivation sample included individual-level participant data from 25 data sets (N=3 281 919) between 1992 and 2017. The primary outcome was CVD (atherosclerotic CVD and heart failure). Predictors included traditional risk factors (smoking status, systolic blood pressure, cholesterol, antihypertensive or statin use, and diabetes) and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Models were sex-specific, race-free, developed on the age scale, and adjusted for competing risk of non-CVD death. Analyses were conducted in each data set and meta-analyzed. Discrimination was assessed using the Harrell C-statistic. Calibration was calculated as the slope of the observed versus predicted risk by decile. Additional equations to predict each CVD subtype (atherosclerotic CVD and heart failure) and include optional predictors (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio and hemoglobin A1c), and social deprivation index were also developed. External validation was performed in 3 330 085 participants from 21 additional data sets. RESULTS: Among 6 612 004 adults included, mean±SD age was 53±12 years, and 56% were women. Over a mean±SD follow-up of 4.8±3.1 years, there were 211 515 incident total CVD events. The median C-statistics in external validation for CVD were 0.794 (interquartile interval, 0.763–0.809) in female and 0.757 (0.727–0.778) in male participants. The calibration slopes were 1.03 (interquartile interval, 0.81–1.16) and 0.94 (0.81–1.13) among female and male participants, respectively. Similar estimates for discrimination and calibration were observed for atherosclerotic CVD– and heart failure–specific models. The improvement in discrimination was small but statistically significant when urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio, hemoglobin A1c, and social deprivation index were added together to the base model to total CVD (ΔC-statistic [interquartile interval] 0.004 [0.004–0.005] and 0.005 [0.004–0.007] among female and male participants, respectively). Calibration improved significantly when the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio was added to the base model among those with marked albuminuria (>300 mg/g; 1.05 [0.84–1.20] versus 1.39 [1.14–1.65]; P =0.01). CONCLUSIONS: PREVENT equations accurately and precisely predicted risk for incident CVD and CVD subtypes in a large, diverse, and contemporary sample of US adults by using routinely available clinical variables.

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 · 10.1161/circulationaha.123.067626

Cites

92 of 92 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?

  • Sensitivity analyses applying the American Heart Association PREVENT risk formula based on a diverse population produced a directionally consistent treatment effect.

    “We have conducted sensitivity analyses by applying the American Heart Association (AHA) Predicting Risk of CVD Events (PREVENT) risk formula based on diverse population, which produced directionally consistent treatment effect.33”
  • The American Heart Association's PREVENT Equations use a social deprivation index to recognize the impact that social deprivation can have on cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic conditions.

    “The American Heart Association’s PREVENT Equations use a social deprivation index to recognize the impact that social deprivation can have on cardiovascular-kidney-metabolic conditions [96,99].”

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
Khan, S. S., Matsushita, K., Sang, Y., Ballew, S. H., Grams, M. E., Surapaneni, A., Blaha, M. J., Carson, A. P., Chang, A. R., Ciemins, E., Go, A. S., Gutierrez, O. M., Hwang, S.-J., Jassal, S. K., Kovesdy, C. P., Lloyd-Jones, D. M., Shlipak, M. G., Palaniappan, L. P., Sperling, L., Virani, S. S., Tuttle, K., Neeland, I. J., Chow, S. L., Rangaswami, J., Pencina, M. J., Ndumele, C. E., Coresh, J., & for the Chronic Kidney Disease Prognosis Consortium and the American Heart Association Cardiovascular-Kidney-Metabolic Science Advisory Group
Affiliations
  • Northwestern University (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • University of Mississippi Medical Center (US)
  • Departments of Nephrology and Population Health Sciences, Geisinger Health, Danville, PA (A.R.C.).
  • American Medical Group Association (US)
  • Kaiser Permanente (US)
  • Departments of Epidemiology and Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham (O.M.G.).
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • University of Tennessee Health Science Center (US)
  • Department of Preventive Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL (D.M.L.-J.).
  • San Francisco VA Medical Center (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • Emory University (US)
  • Aga Khan University (PK)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University Hospitals of Cleveland (US)
  • Western University of Health Sciences (US)
  • George Washington University (US)
  • Duke University (US)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2024-02-06
Volume
149
Issue
6
Pages
430-449
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W4388573970
Cited by
1,234
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 631 · 2025: 467 · 2024: 134 · 2023: 2
FWCI
314.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center) (submittedVersion)
  • eCommons - AKU (Aga Khan University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • HHS | NIH | National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (R01DK100446)
  • HHS | NIH | National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R21HL165376)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Keywords
PREVENT equations, cardiovascular risk prediction, absolute cardiovascular risk, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, albumin-creatinine ratio, estimated glomerular filtration rate, social deprivation index, HbA1c, risk discrimination and calibration
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Albumins, American Heart Association, Cardiovascular Diseases, Creatinine, Female, Heart Failure, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Risk Assessment, Atherosclerosis

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