
doi: 10.1136/bmj.i4483
pmid: 27530313
Damen and colleagues present an interesting overview of prediction models for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, with recommendations for future practice.1 Unfortunately, although they make much of the so called “validation” of these scores in research articles, they say nothing about its relevance to current clinical practice. In predictive modelling, as reviewed by these authors, historical data are used to predict a known future. Each model produces a risk score on a scale of 0-1 (or 0%-100%), but each outcome is either an event or a non-event, so the score …
Cardiovascular Diseases, Risk Factors, Humans, Cardiovascular System, Risk Assessment
Cardiovascular Diseases, Risk Factors, Humans, Cardiovascular System, Risk Assessment
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 18 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
