Lack of social health determinants on risk prediction tools for cardiovascular disease: A systematic review of systematic reviews.

ConclusionsThere is not enough scientific evidence to allow us to choose a CVD risk prediction tool over others, in terms of discrimination, calibration, and reclassification of performance. Also, SD are not included in the risk assessment tools.Lessons learnedProgrammes to provide integrated care of cardiovascular prevention and treatment have been developed (8). Unfortunately, CVD risk assessment, considering care pathways to socially risk patients (poor working conditions, illiteracy, etc.) when CVD risk is also present, remains as a gap.LimitationsWe limited our search to those sources that we have access to. There is the possibility of publication bias; maybe, studies that do not show promising results of a specific CVD risk assessment tool when comparing with others have not being published.Suggestions for future researchIt is necessary to evaluate the differences or similarities among CVD risk prediction tools to reach a consensus regarding the most promising scores. Researchers should test social determinants as predictors of CVD (9). Published on 2022-04-08 00:00:00
Source: International Journal of Integrated Care - Category: Nursing Source Type: research