“…The assessment for MRFs varied across the 5 studies. 18,22,32,53,57 Most of the studies used a combination of the following: medical history 18,22,32,53,57 ; marathon race history 18,22,32,53,57 ; physical examination 18,22,32,53,57 ; blood analyses 18,22,32,53,57 ; sociodemographic history 18,19,20 ; Framingham risk score (FRS) 23,32,33,35 ; Rose angina questionnaire 23,32,33,35 ; nonvalidated questionnaires, 23,32,33,35 for example on lifestyle, 48,53 health, nutrition, exercise, and psychosocial and socioeconomic risk factors; interviews 23,32,33,35 ; Prospective Cardiovascular Münster (PROCAM) cardiovascular study CV risk score 57 ; BORG rating of perceived exertion scale 22 ; and an exercise treadmill stress test (GXT). 22 It was difficult to compare these data as not all studies followed specific criteria that can be noted in their measurement of BP and recall data, which could influence bias.…”