A comparison of methods for assessing mortality risk.
A comparison of methods for assessing mortality risk.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/ajhb.22595
复制
发表时间：
2014-11
影响因子：
2.9
通讯作者：
Crimmins, Eileen M.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Levine, Morgan E.;Crimmins, Eileen M.
开发了诸如非稳态负荷、脆性风险评分和生物年龄的概念，以将来自多个测量的联合收割机信息组合成单个潜在变量，该潜在变量可用于量化人的生物状态。鉴于这些不同的方法，本文的目标是比较这三种方法在一个具有全国代表性的美国大样本中预测随后的全因和疾病特异性死亡率的效果。我们的研究人群包括9，942名年龄在30岁及以上的成年人，来自国家健康和营养调查III。使用整个样本和分层年龄组的受试者操作特征曲线和考克斯比例风险模型，比较非稳态负荷、脆性风险评分和生物学年龄预测样本中10年全因死亡率和疾病特异性死亡率的效果，在96，420人年的暴露中，有1，076人死亡。总的来说，生物年龄预测10年死亡率比其他年龄范围以及50-69岁和70岁以上的参与者更准确。此外，在这三项指标中，生物年龄与全因死亡率和癌症死亡率的相关性最强，而心脏病风险评分与心血管疾病死亡率的相关性最强。量化生物风险的方法提供了重要的途径，以提高我们的理解的原因和生理功能和失调的变化的后果。生物年龄提供了一种替代方法，在某些情况下，更准确的总结方法，传统上使用的方法，如非稳态负荷和脆性风险评分。
Concepts such as Allostatic Load, Framingham Risk Score, and Biological Age were developed to combine information from multiple measures into a single latent variable that can be used to quantify a person's biological state. Given these varying approaches, the goal of this paper is to compare how well these three measures predict subsequent all-cause and disease-specific mortality within a large nationally representative U.S. sample. Our study population consisted of 9,942 adults, ages 30 and above from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III. Receiver Operating Characteristic curves and Cox Proportional Hazard models for the whole sample and for stratified age groups were used to compare how well Allostatic Load, Framingham Risk Score, and Biological Age predict ten-year all-cause and disease-specific mortality in the sample, for whom there were 1,076 deaths over 96,420 person years of exposure. Overall, Biological Age predicted 10-year mortality more accurately than other measures for the full age range, as well as for participants ages 50-69 and 70 +. Additionally, out of the three measures, Biological Age had the strongest association with all-cause and cancer mortality, while the Framingham Risk Score had the strongest association with CVD mortality. Methods for quantifying biological risk provide important approaches to improving our understanding of the causes and consequences of changes in physiological function and dysregulation. Biological Age offers an alternative and, in some cases more accurate summary approach to the traditionally used methods, such as Allostatic Load and Framingham Risk Score.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
37.8
作者：
Wilson, PWF;D'Agostino, RB;Kannel, WB
通讯作者：
Kannel, WB
DOI：
10.1073/pnas.081072698
发表时间：
2001-04-10
影响因子：
11.1
作者：
Seeman, TE;McEwen, BS;Singer, BH
通讯作者：
Singer, BH
影响因子：
37.8
作者：
Cook, Nancy R.
通讯作者：
Cook, Nancy R.
影响因子：
5.3
作者：
Klemera, P;Doubal, S
通讯作者：
Doubal, S
影响因子：
8.3
作者：
Wang, Thomas J.;Gona, Philimon;Vasan, Ramachandran S.
通讯作者：
Vasan, Ramachandran S.