Including socioeconomic status in coronary heart disease risk estimation

Peter Franks, Daniel J Tancredi, Paul Winters, Kevin Fiscella

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

31 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

PURPOSE Socioeconomic status (SES) predicts coronary heart disease independently of the Framingham risk-scoring factors included in cholesterol treatment guidelines, possibly resulting in undertreatment of lower SES persons. We examined whether hybrid SES measures (based on area measures of income and individual education) address this bias and derived an approach to incorporating SES information into treatment guidelines. METHODS The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study data (initiated in 1987 with a 10-year follow-up of 15,495 adults aged 45 to 64 years in 4 southern and midwestern communities) were used to assess the calibration bias of 4 Cox models predicting 10-year coronary heart disease risk: Framingham risk score alone, and Framingham risk score plus SES using an individual-based measure (income less than 150% federal poverty level or less then 12 years of schooling), and 2 hybrid SES measures substituting area-based income measures (block group or zip code median incomes of less than 25th national percentiles) for the individual income component. Revised cholesterol treatment thresholds based on SES risk were also derived. RESULTS Use of either the block group hybrid or individual-based SES measures eliminated the significant SES bias observed using Framingham risk score alone. Cholesterol treatment guideline thresholds of 10% and 20% coronary heart disease risk (based on the Framingham risk score) were reduced to 6% and 13% for those with low SES. CONCLUSIONS Using patient income based on block group and individual education minimizes the SES bias in Framingham risk scoring and suggests more aggressive cholesterol treatment thresholds for low-SES persons.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)447-453
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Family Medicine
Volume8
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2010

Fingerprint

Social Class
Coronary Disease
Cholesterol
Guidelines
Therapeutics
Education
Poverty
Proportional Hazards Models
Calibration
Atherosclerosis

Keywords

  • Cholesterol
  • Coronary disease/prevention and control
  • Epidemiology
  • Risk factors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Family Practice

Cite this

Including socioeconomic status in coronary heart disease risk estimation. / Franks, Peter; Tancredi, Daniel J; Winters, Paul; Fiscella, Kevin.

In: Annals of Family Medicine, Vol. 8, No. 5, 09.2010, p. 447-453.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{88a646d7b20e46c8a9d26850c9b28c35,
title = "Including socioeconomic status in coronary heart disease risk estimation",
abstract = "PURPOSE Socioeconomic status (SES) predicts coronary heart disease independently of the Framingham risk-scoring factors included in cholesterol treatment guidelines, possibly resulting in undertreatment of lower SES persons. We examined whether hybrid SES measures (based on area measures of income and individual education) address this bias and derived an approach to incorporating SES information into treatment guidelines. METHODS The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study data (initiated in 1987 with a 10-year follow-up of 15,495 adults aged 45 to 64 years in 4 southern and midwestern communities) were used to assess the calibration bias of 4 Cox models predicting 10-year coronary heart disease risk: Framingham risk score alone, and Framingham risk score plus SES using an individual-based measure (income less than 150{\%} federal poverty level or less then 12 years of schooling), and 2 hybrid SES measures substituting area-based income measures (block group or zip code median incomes of less than 25th national percentiles) for the individual income component. Revised cholesterol treatment thresholds based on SES risk were also derived. RESULTS Use of either the block group hybrid or individual-based SES measures eliminated the significant SES bias observed using Framingham risk score alone. Cholesterol treatment guideline thresholds of 10{\%} and 20{\%} coronary heart disease risk (based on the Framingham risk score) were reduced to 6{\%} and 13{\%} for those with low SES. CONCLUSIONS Using patient income based on block group and individual education minimizes the SES bias in Framingham risk scoring and suggests more aggressive cholesterol treatment thresholds for low-SES persons.",
keywords = "Cholesterol, Coronary disease/prevention and control, Epidemiology, Risk factors",
author = "Peter Franks and Tancredi, {Daniel J} and Paul Winters and Kevin Fiscella",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1370/afm.1167",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "447--453",
journal = "Annals of Family Medicine",
issn = "1544-1709",
publisher = "Annals of Family Medicine, Inc",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Including socioeconomic status in coronary heart disease risk estimation

AU - Franks, Peter

AU - Tancredi, Daniel J

AU - Winters, Paul

AU - Fiscella, Kevin

PY - 2010/9

Y1 - 2010/9

N2 - PURPOSE Socioeconomic status (SES) predicts coronary heart disease independently of the Framingham risk-scoring factors included in cholesterol treatment guidelines, possibly resulting in undertreatment of lower SES persons. We examined whether hybrid SES measures (based on area measures of income and individual education) address this bias and derived an approach to incorporating SES information into treatment guidelines. METHODS The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study data (initiated in 1987 with a 10-year follow-up of 15,495 adults aged 45 to 64 years in 4 southern and midwestern communities) were used to assess the calibration bias of 4 Cox models predicting 10-year coronary heart disease risk: Framingham risk score alone, and Framingham risk score plus SES using an individual-based measure (income less than 150% federal poverty level or less then 12 years of schooling), and 2 hybrid SES measures substituting area-based income measures (block group or zip code median incomes of less than 25th national percentiles) for the individual income component. Revised cholesterol treatment thresholds based on SES risk were also derived. RESULTS Use of either the block group hybrid or individual-based SES measures eliminated the significant SES bias observed using Framingham risk score alone. Cholesterol treatment guideline thresholds of 10% and 20% coronary heart disease risk (based on the Framingham risk score) were reduced to 6% and 13% for those with low SES. CONCLUSIONS Using patient income based on block group and individual education minimizes the SES bias in Framingham risk scoring and suggests more aggressive cholesterol treatment thresholds for low-SES persons.

AB - PURPOSE Socioeconomic status (SES) predicts coronary heart disease independently of the Framingham risk-scoring factors included in cholesterol treatment guidelines, possibly resulting in undertreatment of lower SES persons. We examined whether hybrid SES measures (based on area measures of income and individual education) address this bias and derived an approach to incorporating SES information into treatment guidelines. METHODS The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study data (initiated in 1987 with a 10-year follow-up of 15,495 adults aged 45 to 64 years in 4 southern and midwestern communities) were used to assess the calibration bias of 4 Cox models predicting 10-year coronary heart disease risk: Framingham risk score alone, and Framingham risk score plus SES using an individual-based measure (income less than 150% federal poverty level or less then 12 years of schooling), and 2 hybrid SES measures substituting area-based income measures (block group or zip code median incomes of less than 25th national percentiles) for the individual income component. Revised cholesterol treatment thresholds based on SES risk were also derived. RESULTS Use of either the block group hybrid or individual-based SES measures eliminated the significant SES bias observed using Framingham risk score alone. Cholesterol treatment guideline thresholds of 10% and 20% coronary heart disease risk (based on the Framingham risk score) were reduced to 6% and 13% for those with low SES. CONCLUSIONS Using patient income based on block group and individual education minimizes the SES bias in Framingham risk scoring and suggests more aggressive cholesterol treatment thresholds for low-SES persons.

KW - Cholesterol

KW - Coronary disease/prevention and control

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Risk factors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957743104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957743104&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1370/afm.1167

DO - 10.1370/afm.1167

M3 - Article

C2 - 20843887

AN - SCOPUS:77957743104

VL - 8

SP - 447

EP - 453

JO - Annals of Family Medicine

JF - Annals of Family Medicine

SN - 1544-1709

IS - 5

ER -