Letters
QRISK validation and evaluation
QRISK may be less useful
BMJ 2009; 339 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b3485 (Published 01 September 2009) Cite this as: BMJ 2009;339:b3485
- Su May Liew, research student1,
- Paul Glasziou, professor1
- 1Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Department of Primary Health Care, University of Oxford OX3 7LF
- su.liew{at}dphpc.ox.ac.uk
Collins and Altman inappropriately criticise the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) for not choosing QRISK to predict cardiovascular risk.1 In doing so, they do not distinguish between assessing individual cardiovascular risk (as used by clinicians) and predicting risk of cardiovascular events in an actively managed population (as used in public health planning). As …
Log in
Log in using your username and password
Log in through your institution
Subscribe from £184 *
Subscribe and get access to all BMJ articles, and much more.
* For online subscription
Access this article for 1 day for:
£50 / $60/ €56 (excludes VAT)
You can download a PDF version for your personal record.