Assessing coronary risk assessment: what's next?
作者信息
Fiscella Kevin, Franks Peter
出版信息
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Nov;25(11):1140-1. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1469-8.
Abstract
摘要
相似文献
1
Assessing coronary risk assessment: what's next?
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Nov;25(11):1140-1. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1469-8.
2
Coronary heart disease: acceptance of guideline recommendations irrelevant in Germany?
Fam Pract. 2003 Jun;20(3):350. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmg318.
3
Practice patterns related to the Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines in primary care.
Am J Cardiol. 2002 Sep 15;90(6):687. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(02)02739-x.
4
Changing from CHD to CVD risk-based guidelines for the management of mild uncomplicated hypertension in different ethnic groups: implications for primary care.
J Hum Hypertens. 2005 Apr;19(4):321-4. doi: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1001829.
5
Cardiovascular disease in women: what's different? What's new? What's unresolved?
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1994 Dec 30;736:147-57. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1994.tb12827.x.
6
Using nontraditional risk factors in coronary heart disease risk assessment.
Am Fam Physician. 2011 Feb 15;83(4):449.
7
The National Service Framework for coronary heart disease: the emperor's new clothes.
J R Coll Physicians Lond. 2000 May-Jun;34(3):226-9; discussion 229-30.
8
Impact of health care initiatives on outcomes of acute coronary syndromes.
Heart. 2006 Mar;92(3):293-5. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2004.058305.
9
Coronary heart disease: an update on progress of the NSF.
Br J Community Nurs. 2005 Apr;10(4):180-4. doi: 10.12968/bjcn.2005.10.4.17959.
10
The heart of the matter. National guidelines urge more aggressive cholesterol treatment.
Adv Nurse Pract. 2002 Jan;10(1):42-7; quiz 48-9.
本文引用的文献
1
Coronary risk assessment by point-based vs. equation-based Framingham models: significant implications for clinical care.
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Nov;25(11):1145-51. doi: 10.1007/s11606-010-1454-2. Epub 2010 Sep 8.
2
Health information technology: laying the infrastructure for national health reform.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2010 Jun;29(6):1214-9. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0503.
3
Unintended effects of statins in men and women in England and Wales: population based cohort study using the QResearch database.
BMJ. 2010 May 20;340:c2197. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c2197.
4
Adding socioeconomic status to Framingham scoring to reduce disparities in coronary risk assessment.
Am Heart J. 2009 Jun;157(6):988-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.03.019.
5
Physicians' attitudes and adherence to use of risk scores for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: cross-sectional survey in three world regions.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2009 May;25(5):1171-8. doi: 10.1185/03007990902846423.
6
Electronic health record-based cardiac risk assessment and identification of unmet preventive needs.
Med Care. 2009 Apr;47(4):418-24. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e31818dce21.
7
Predicting cardiovascular risk in England and Wales: prospective derivation and validation of QRISK2.
BMJ. 2008 Jun 28;336(7659):1475-82. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39609.449676.25. Epub 2008 Jun 23.
8
Integrated electronic decision support increases cardiovascular disease risk assessment four fold in routine primary care practice.
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2008 Apr;15(2):173-8. doi: 10.1097/HJR.0b013e3282f13af4.
9
Does the routine use of global coronary heart disease risk scores translate into clinical benefits or harms? A systematic review of the literature.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2008 Mar 20;8:60. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-60.
10
Derivation and validation of QRISK, a new cardiovascular disease risk score for the United Kingdom: prospective open cohort study.
BMJ. 2007 Jul 21;335(7611):136. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39261.471806.55. Epub 2007 Jul 5.
Zotero 插件