Modeling Cardiovascular Disease Prevention

ArticleinJAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 303(9):835; author reply 835 · March 2010with1 Reads
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2010.188 · Source: PubMed
Abstract
To the Editor: In their Commentary, Drs Hingorani and Psaty1 invoked the prevention paradox (a large proportion of cardiovascular disease [CVD] events occur among the many individuals with average risk factor values) in their discussion of whether to embrace new CVD risk markers as tools for targeting or personalizing statin therapy. They also described another well-known apparent paradox: even risk markers that are strongly associated with the outcome of interest (relative risks of 3 to 5 or even larger) often seem to contribute little in terms of discrimination or reclassification.2
  • Article · Mar 2011
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The net reclassification improvement (NRI) is an increasingly popular measure for evaluating improvements in risk predictions. This article details a review of 67 publications in high-impact general clinical journals that considered the NRI. Incomplete reporting of NRI methods, incorrect calculation, and common misinterpretations were found. To aid improved applications of the NRI, the article elaborates on several aspects of the computation and interpretation in various settings. Limitations and controversies are discussed, including the effect of miscalibration of prediction models, the use of the continuous NRI and clinical NRI, and the relation with decision analytic measures. A systematic approach toward presenting NRI analysis is proposed: Detail and motivate the methods used for computation of the NRI, use clinically meaningful risk cutoffs for the category-based NRI, report both NRI components, address issues of calibration, and do not interpret the overall NRI as a percentage of the study population reclassified. Promising NRI findings need to be followed with decision analytic or formal costeffectiveness evaluations.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The net reclassification improvement (NRI) is an increasingly popular measure for evaluating improvements in risk predictions. This article details a review of 67 publications in high-impact general clinical journals that considered the NRI. Incomplete reporting of NRI methods, incorrect calculation, and common misinterpretations were found. To aid improved applications of the NRI, the article elaborates on several aspects of the computation and interpretation in various settings. Limitations and controversies are discussed, including the effect of miscalibration of prediction models, the use of the continuous NRI and “clinical NRI,” and the relation with decision analytic measures. A systematic approach toward presenting NRI analysis is proposed: Detail and motivate the methods used for computation of the NRI, use clinically meaningful risk cutoffs for the category-based NRI, report both NRI components, address issues of calibration, and do not interpret the overall NRI as a percentage of the study population reclassified. Promising NRI findings need to be followed with decision analytic or formal cost-effectiveness evaluations.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014