There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores  affect CVD events .
Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm .
BACKGROUND The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention .
Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools , or CVD risk scores , have attracted considerable attention , their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes , risk factor levels , preventive medication prescribing , and health behaviours .
The effectiveness of personalized coronary heart disease and stroke risk communication.
BACKGROUND Current guidelines recommend global risk assessment to guide vascular risk factor management ; however , most provider-patient communication focuses on individual risk factors in isolation . We sought to evaluate the impact of personalized coronary heart disease and stroke risk communication on patients ' knowledge , beliefs , and health behavior . METHODS We conducted a r and omized controlled trial testing personalized risk communication based on Framingham stroke and coronary heart disease risk scores compared with a st and ard risk factor education . A total of 89 patients were recruited from primary care clinics and followed up for 3 months . Outcomes included the following : risk perception and worry , risk factor knowledge , risk reduction preferences and decision conflict , medication adherence , health behaviors , and blood pressure . RESULTS Participants had a very low underst and ing of numeric information , high perceived risk for stroke or myocardial infa rct ion , and high proportion of medication nonadherence . Patients ' ability to identify vascular risk factors increased with personalized risk communication ( mean 1.8 additional risk factors , 95 % CI 1.3 - 2.2 ) and st and ard risk factor education ( mean 1.6 additional risk factors , 95 % CI 1.1 - 2.1 ) immediately after the intervention but was not sustained at 3 months . Patients in the personalized group had less decision conflict than the st and ard risk factor education group over intended risk reduction strategies ( 5.9 vs 10.1 , P = .003 ) . There was no appreciable impact of either communication strategy on medication adherence , exercise , smoking cessation , or blood pressure . CONCLUSIONS Personalized risk communication was preferred by patients and had a small impact on risk reduction preferences and decision conflict but had no impact on patient beliefs or behavior compared with st and ard risk factor education
There is uncertainty whether current strategies for providing CVD risk scores  affect CVD events .
Providing CVD risk scores may slightly reduce CVD risk factor levels and may increase preventive medication prescribing in higher-risk people without evidence of harm .
BACKGROUND The current paradigm for cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) emphasises absolute risk assessment to guide treatment decisions in primary prevention .
Although the derivation and validation of multivariable risk assessment tools , or CVD risk scores , have attracted considerable attention , their effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of evaluating and providing CVD risk scores in adults without prevalent CVD on cardiovascular outcomes , risk factor levels , preventive medication prescribing , and health behaviours .