You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Correspondence
Considerations on the poor discriminatory power of the FRANCE-2 risk score: Authors' reply
  1. Bernard Iung1,
  2. Cedric Laouenan2,
  3. Alec Vahanian1,
  4. Martine Gilard3
  1. 1Department of Cardiology, Bichat Hospital, Paris, France 
  2. 2Biostatistics Department, Bichat Hospital, Paris, France
  3. 3Department of Cardiology, Brest University, Brest, France
  1. Correspondence to Professor Bernard Iung, Department of Cardiology, Bichat Hospital, 46 rue Henri Huchard, Paris 75018, France; bernard.iung{at}bch.aphp.fr

https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307208

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The Authors’ reply, we thank Diaz et al1 for their positive comments on the methodology used to develop the FRANCE-2 transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) score.2 We also share their opinion that its discrimination limits the accurate identification of patients who are likely to die shortly after TAVI. This should, however, be balanced by the good calibration. We agree that ‘the creation of an efficient and reliable predictive model for TAVI seems to be of the biggest challenges’. Nevertheless, the means to reach this goal is …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors BI drafted the letter. CL, AV and MG reviewed and amended its content.

    • Competing interests BI has received consultant fees from Abbott, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Valtech and speaker's fees from Edwards Lifesciences. AV is member of Advisory Board for Medtronic, Abbott, Valtech and Boehringer Ingelheim and has received speaker's fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Siemens.

    • Ethics approval Institutional review board of the French Ministry of Health.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles