Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
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.
BMJ 2008;336:1445-1446 (28 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.a480 (published 23 June 2008)
Estimating risk is not the problem, using it to tailor treatment to individuals is
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
In the linked study, Hippisley-Cox and colleagues develop and validate the second version of the QRISK cardiovascular disease risk algorithm (QRISK2), an attempt to more accurately estimate cardiovascular risk in patients from different ethnic groups in England and Wales.1
The advent of the first Framingham risk tables in the early 1990s was a challenge for most doctors. Since the second world war the management of cardiovascular risk has been part of the core business of general practice, but the single risk model dominated. Hypertension, diabetes, and hypercholesterolaemia were islands, each with its own experts fighting for bigger kingdoms by pushing for ever stricter boundaries and demanding more attention.
Framingham taught us to look at the different risk factors, and provided a major lesson: a cumulative average risk could be more important than one peak. Yet soon the extrapolation of these US tables to European populations seemed to overshoot the real
Thierry Christiaens, professor of general practice1
1 Department of General Practice and PHC & Heymans Institute of Pharmacology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
thierry.christiaens@ugent.be
Read all Rapid Responses
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.