This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related letters  • Related articles  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Neurology  • Cerebrovascular Disease  • Women's Health, Other  • Stroke  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In their study of algorithms for assessing cardiovascular risk in women, Dr Ridker and colleagues¹ conclude that the Reynolds risk score reclassified 40% to 50% of women at intermediate risk into higher- or lower-risk categories. This conclusion is misleading and based on incomplete analytical methodology. The proportion of women reclassified is based on Table 5 in the article, which compares the Reynolds risk score with the Third Report of the Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (ATP III) model.² However, the latter model was developed for hard coronary heart disease end points (myocardial infarction or coronary death). The broader definition of cardiovascular disease used in the Reynolds risk score translates into larger 10-year absolute risks, which may be reflected as enhanced reclassification. We therefore believe that Table 5 has limited merit.

Table 4 in the article offers a more valid . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Michael J. Pencina, PhD
mpencina@bu.edu
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Boston University
Boston, Massachusetts

Ramachandran S. Vasan, MD
Framingham Heart Study
Framingham, Massachusetts

Ralph B. D’Agostino Sr, PhD
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
Boston University

RELATED LETTERS

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women
Thomas J. Wang, Sekar Kathiresan, and Donald M. Lloyd-Jones
JAMA. 2007;298(2):176.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women
Richard Stevens and Ruth Coleman
JAMA. 2007;298(2):176-177.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women
Lori B. Daniels, Ori Ben-Yehuda, and Alan S. Maisel
JAMA. 2007;298(2):177.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women—Reply
Paul M Ridker and Nancy R. Cook
JAMA. 2007;298(2):177-178.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLES

Development and Validation of Improved Algorithms for the Assessment of Global Cardiovascular Risk in Women: The Reynolds Risk Score
Paul M Ridker, Julie E. Buring, Nader Rifai, and Nancy R. Cook
JAMA. 2007;297(6):611-619.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Executive Summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III)
Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults
JAMA. 2001;285(19):2486-2497.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evaluation of the Framingham Risk Score in the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer-Norfolk Cohort: Does Adding Glycated Hemoglobin Improve the Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease Events?
Simmons et al.
Arch Intern Med 2008;168:1209-1216.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

New cardiovascular risk determinants do exist and are clinically useful
Smulders et al.
Eur Heart J 2008;29:436-440.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT