Table 3.

Studies excluded from the systematic review and reason for exclusion.

Study	Objective	Outcome	Design	Sample size and inclusion criteria	Follow-up	Scoring system	Summary of results	Reason for exclusion
Gupta et al. [52] 2005	To compare a modified cardiac risk assessment to patients who died versus a group that survived	Death	Retrospective case control (Newcastle Upon Tyne, United Kingdom)	n = 247    146 cases (death) versus 101 control scores	Charts reviewed from 1996 to 2003	Modified Cardiac Risk Assessment (based on guidelines for perioperative CV evaluation for noncardiac surgery from the ACC/AHA task force)	Deceased group had higher CV risk scores. Correlation between risk score and mortality.	Case-control study design did not meet inclusion criteria; methodological issues
de Pádua Netto et al. [53] 2012	To assess ability of FRS to predict CV events in a population theoretically without risk factors	Unclear	Retrospective cohort study (Brazil)	n = 126    RTR with a functioning graft for >6 months	45 ± 16 years   65% male (n = 82)	Framingham   Charts reviewed from 2005 to 2010	FRS does not adequately quantify real CV risk	Observational only; FRS in this population was assessed, but outcome was poorly described with no clear process defined to meet objective

CV: cardiovascular; ACC: American College of Cardiology; AHA: American Heart Association.