Abstract 174: Clinical Prediction Models for Cardiovascular Disease: The Tufts PACE CPM Database

Abstract

Background: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) estimate the probability of clinical outcomes and hold the potential to improve decision making and individualize care. For patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) there are numerous CPMs available though the extent of this literature is not well described. Methods and Results: We conducted a systematic review for articles containing CPMs for CVD published between January 1990 through May 2012. CVD includes coronary artery disease (CAD), congestive heart failure (CHF), arrhythmias, stroke, venous thromboembolism (VTE) and peripheral vascular disease (PVD). We created a novel database and characterized CPMs based on the stage of development, population under study, performance, covariates, and predicted outcomes. We included articles that describe newly developed CPMs that predict the risk of developing an outcome (prognostic models) or the probability of a specific diagnosis (diagnostic models). There are 796 models included in this database representing 31 distinct index conditions. 717 (90%) are de novo CPMs, 21 (3%) are CPM recalibrations, and 58 (7%) are CPM adaptations. There are 215 CPMs for patients with CAD, 168 CPMs for population samples at risk for incident CVD, and 79 models for patients with CHF (Figure). De novo CPMs predicting mortality were most commonly published for patients with known CAD (98 models) followed by HF (63 models) and stroke (24 models). There are 77 distinct index/ outcome (I/O) pairings and models are roughly evenly split between those predicting short term outcomes (< 3 months) and those predicting long term outcomes (< 6 months). There are 41 diagnostic CPMs included in this database, most commonly predicting diagnoses of CAD (11 models), VTE (10 models), and acute coronary syndrome (5 models). Of the de novo models in this database 450 (63%) report a c-statistic and 259 (36%) report either the Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic or show a calibration plot. Conclusions: There is an abundance of CPMs available for many CVD conditions, with substantial redundancy in the literature. The comparative performance of these models, the consistency of effects and risk estimates across models and the actual and potential clinical impact of this body of literature is poorly understood.