Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan 30;19:30. doi: 10.1186/s12872-019-1009-3

Table 5.

Comparison of models for prediction of CVD and CHD mortality without and with addition of electrocardiographic abnormalities

ECG CVD mortality CHD mortality
abnormalities Men n = 281 Women n = 167 Men n = 172 Women n = 96
Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2
HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI) HR (95% CI)
No 1 1 1 1
Yes 2.34 (1.72–3.19) 1.56 (1.09–2.24) 2.15 (1.44–3.22) 1.71 (1.07–2.73)
Harrell‘s C 0.704 0.730 0.803 0.814 0.715 0.745 0.829 0.842
LRT (p-value) 24.62 (< 0.001) 5.48 (0.019) 12.02 (< 0.001) 4.79 (0.029)
IDI (p-value) 0.013 (0.007) 0.004 (0.040) 0.010 (< 0.001) 0.004 (0.173)
NRI (p-value) 0.186 (0.007) 0.186 (0.153) 0.252 (0.027) 0.212 (0.206)

Model 1 – factors included into model: age, education, arterial hypertension, high density lipoprotein cholesterol, low density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, body mass index, smoking; Model 2 – variables of Model 1 plus ECG abnormalities

CHD coronary heart disease, CI confidence interval, CVD cardiovascular diseases, HR hazard ratio, IDI integrated discrimination improvement, LRT likelihood ratio test, NRI net reclassification index

Bold typeface indicates significance