To the Editor: Davis and colleagues stated that the Framingham and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) cardiovascular risk equations are not suitable for predicting risk in an Australian population with type 2 diabetes.1 If confirmed, this would be extremely disappointing. However, before accepting this conclusion the following important considerations should be noted.
The full article is accessible to AMA
members and paid subscribers.
Login to MJA or subscribe now.
- Diabetes and Endocrine Services, Royal Hobart Hospital, Hobart, TAS.
Correspondence: roland.mccallum@dhhs.tas.gov.au
- 1. Davis WA, Colagiuri S, Davis TME. Comparison of the Framingham and United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study cardiovascular risk equations in Australian patients with type 2 diabetes from the Fremantle Diabetes Study. Med J Aust 2009; 190: 180-184. <MJA full text>
- 2. Brindle PM, Beswick AD, Fahey T, Ebrahim SB. Accuracy and impact of risk assessment in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review. Heart 2006; 92: 1752-1759.
- 3. Simmons RK, Coleman RL, Price HC, et al. Performance of the UK Prospective Diabetes Study risk engine and the Framingham risk equations in estimating cardiovascular disease in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort. Diabetes Care 2009; 32: 708-13.
- 4. Booth GL, Kapral MK, Fung K, Tu JV. Relation between age and cardiovascular disease in men and women with diabetes compared with non-diabetic people: a population-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2006; 368: 29-36.
Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.