Review of Coronary Heart Disease Policy Models
Author Information
Author(s): Unal Belgin, Capewell Simon, Critchley Julia Alison
Hypothesis
The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the strengths and limitations of existing CHD policy models.
Conclusion
Existing CHD policy models vary widely in their depth, breadth, quality, utility and versatility.
Supporting Evidence
- 75 articles describing 42 models were included in the review.
- Only 5 out of 42 models were comprehensive, considering both risk factors and treatments.
- The majority of models did not report on limitations of their methodology.
Takeaway
This study looked at different models used to understand and predict heart disease, finding that they are all quite different in quality and usefulness.
Methodology
A systematic review was conducted, including a search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and manual checks of references.
Potential Biases
Few models reported on quality issues, and many did not adequately discuss limitations or assumptions.
Limitations
The review was limited to English language articles, and publication bias may have affected the results.
Participant Demographics
Most models considered young and middle-aged groups, generally aged 15 to 64 years.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website