You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 298 No. 2, July 11, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  Letters
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letters
 •Related article
 •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

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women

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: Dr Ridker and colleagues1 report good results for their cardiovascular risk-scoring method for women, the Reynolds Risk Score. However, the comparison they make to a risk score published by the Framingham Study group is unfairly weighted against the Framingham score. The "validation data" on which the 2 scores are evaluated are closely related to the data on which the Reynolds score is built, having been recruited simultaneously from the same population with the same inclusion criteria and recruitment procedures, and separated from the "training data" only by random resampling. This data set therefore has a close relation to the Reynolds score that it does not have with the Framingham score. The Reynolds score is being subjected to a "cross-validation" procedure while the Framingham score is subjected to "external validation", regarded as a much sterner test.2

In addition, the Framingham risk score used here is for coronary heart . . . [Full Text of this Article]

Richard Stevens, BA, MSc, PhD
richard.stevens@ceu.ox.ac.uk
Cancer Epidemiology Unit

Ruth Coleman, BSc, MSc
Diabetes Trials Unit
University of Oxford
Oxford, England


RELATED LETTERS

Algorithms for Assessing Cardiovascular Risk in Women
Michael J. Pencina, Ramachandran S. Vasan, and Ralph B. D’Agostino, Sr
JAMA. 2007;298(2):175-176.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

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
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 ARTICLE

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  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.