Objective: Prediction models for cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality come from high-income countries, comprising laboratory measurements, not suitable for resource-limited countries. This study... Show moreObjective: Prediction models for cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality come from high-income countries, comprising laboratory measurements, not suitable for resource-limited countries. This study aims to develop and validate a non-laboratory model to predict CVD mortality in a middle-income setting. Study design and setting: We used data of population aged 40-80 years from three cohort studies: Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study (n = 5160), Isfahan Cohort Study (n = 4350), and Golestan Cohort Study (n = 45,500). Using Cox proportional hazard models, we developed prediction models for men and women, separately. Cross-validation and bootstrapping procedures were applied. The models' discrimination and calibration were assessed by concordance statistic (C-index) and calibration plot, respectively. We calculated the models' sensitivity, specificity and net benefit fraction in a threshold probability of 5%. Results: The 10-year CVD mortality risks were 5.1% (95%CI: 4.8-5.5) in men and 3.1% (95%CI: 2.9%-3.3%) in women. The optimism-corrected performance of the model was c = 0.774 in men and c = 0.798 in women. The models showed good calibration in both sexes, with a predicted-to-observed ratio of 1.07 in men and 1.09 in women. The sensitivity was 0.76 in men and 0.66 in women. The net benefit fraction was higher in men compared to women (0.46 vs. 0.35). Conclusion: A low-cost model can discriminate well between low-and high-risk individuals, and can be used for screening in low-middle income countries. (C)& nbsp;2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
Background The use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases is associated with different benefit and harm outcomes. The aime of this study is how important these outcomes are... Show moreBackground The use of statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases is associated with different benefit and harm outcomes. The aime of this study is how important these outcomes are for people and what people's preferences are. Methods We conducted a preference-eliciting survey incorporating a best-worst scaling (BWS) instrument in Iran from June to November 2019. The relative importance of 13 statins-related outcomes was assessed on a sample of 1085 participants, including 913 general population (486 women) and 172 healthcare providers from the population covered by urban and rural primary health care centers. The participants made trade-off decisions and selected the most and least worrisome outcomes concurrently from 13 choice sets; each contains four outcomes generated using the balanced incomplete block design. Results According to the mean (SD) BWS scores, which can be (+ 4) in maximum and (- 4) in minimum, in the general population, the most worrisome outcomes were severe stroke (3.37 (0.8)), severe myocardial infarction (2.71(0.7)), and cancer (2.69 (1.33)). While myopathy (- 3. 03 (1.03)), nausea/headache (- 2.69 (0.94)), and treatment discontinuation due to side effects (- 2.24 (1.14)) were the least worrisome outcomes. Preferences were similar between rural and urban areas and among health care providers and the general population with overlapping uncertainty intervals. Conclusion The rank of health outcomes may be similar in various socio-cultural contexts. The preferences for benefits and harms of statin therapy are essential to assess benefit-harm balance when recommending statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases. Show less
