Statistics from Altmetric.com
The Authors' reply Hippisley-Cox et al's response1 to our paper published in this issue of Heart2 highlights differences between QRISK3 and QRISK24 asserting that QRISK2 improved on QRISK whereas an independent validation concluded that ‘differences in performance were marginal’.5 The wider CIs obtained in the independent validation of QRISK2 († in table 1) by …
Linked article 221085
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval This study was conducted based on Ethical Approval Ref. 08/H0305/2 from the Cambridgeshire 4 Research Ethics Committee.
Provenance and peer review Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.
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.