SPDP Crosslinker web change in medication, death of someone close, depression, and marked change in exercise status or alcohol consumption. Before blood analyses were performed, the investigators adjudicated all such reported events as representing or not a potential confounder of inflammatory status qualified as mild, moderate, or severe. In the qualitative analysis of CRP results, we considered values 2 mg/L as indicative of high risk and values ,2 mg/L as low risk.Statistical MethodsInvestigating the variability of CRP across time can be done using different statistical measures. Some authors have used correlation coefficients, but even very high values of the correlation do not necessarily imply low variability. [18,21,23] Similarly, authors have used intra-class correlation coefficients[19,23], but these are also not optimal, since they are defined as a ratio of between-group variance to total variance, and therefore not a direct measure of within-individual variability. We therefore chose to directly report the variance of CRP, both in terms of descriptive statistics for different time periods, and as estimated by a Bayesian hierarchical model, described below. The design of the study allowed for estimating the variance of CRP across different time periods, including variability within one day, across several consecutive days, across weeks, and across months. Our analysis took advantage of this design, estimating CRP variability in 3 different ways. First, we compiled descriptive statistics for all variables, including means and standard deviations (SD) of CRP, and percentages of baseline categorical variables. Included in these descriptive statistics were CASIN cost estimates of the SDs for each time interval of interest, calculated directly using the observations from the relevant time period. These were done 
both assuming a common SD across all individuals for each time period and allowing individual specific SDs at each time period. In the latter case, we calculated the SD for each individual, and report the median SD value across individuals. To compare CRP values across the 4 clinical groups, medians within each group were calculated by first taking the median value within each subject, and then taking the median across subjects in each group. Confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the medians within each group.CRP VariabilityFigure 2. Display of all CRP values of subjects with a single remote myocardial infarction (MI). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060759.gSecond, while it may be reasonable to assume that each individual has a constant global CRP mean over time, varying only randomly, it is also possible that homoeostatic imbalances cause this mean to shift slightly over days, weeks, or months. Variations could also most likely be due to some combination of these two effects. We therefore constructed a hierarchical model with five different time levels, wherein each individual was allowed to have his or her own mean that could also vary over each time interval. This model will provide conservative estimates of variability compared to a model that forces a fixed mean across time within each subject and which considers all variation to be purely random. This would imply that for each subject if an infinite number of readings were available at each time-point, the averages would be identical. This seems unrealistic and explains why we have chosen a hierarchical approach. Specifically, for each individual, the first level of the hierarchical model assume.Change in medication, death of someone close, depression, and marked change in exercise status or alcohol consumption. Before blood analyses were performed, the investigators adjudicated all such reported events as representing or not a potential confounder of inflammatory status qualified as mild, moderate, or severe. In the qualitative analysis of CRP results, we considered values 2 mg/L as indicative of high risk and values ,2 mg/L as low risk.Statistical MethodsInvestigating the variability of CRP across time can be done using different statistical measures. Some authors have used correlation coefficients, but even very high values of the correlation do not necessarily imply low variability. [18,21,23] Similarly, authors have used intra-class correlation coefficients[19,23], but these are also not optimal, since they are defined as a ratio of between-group variance to total variance, and therefore not a direct measure of within-individual variability. We therefore chose to directly report the variance of CRP, both in terms of descriptive statistics for different time periods, and as estimated by a Bayesian hierarchical model, described below. The design of the study allowed for estimating the variance of CRP across different time periods, including variability within one day, across several consecutive days, across weeks, and across months. Our analysis took advantage of this design, estimating CRP variability in 3 different ways. First, we compiled descriptive statistics for all variables, including means and standard deviations (SD) of CRP, and percentages of baseline categorical variables. Included in these descriptive statistics were estimates of the SDs for each time interval of interest, calculated directly using the observations from the relevant time period. These were done both assuming a common SD across all individuals for each time period and allowing individual specific SDs at each time period. In the latter case, we calculated the SD for each individual, and report the median SD value across individuals. To compare CRP values across the 4 clinical groups, medians within each group were calculated by first taking the median value within each subject, and then taking the median across subjects in each group. Confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the medians within each group.CRP VariabilityFigure 2. Display of all CRP values of subjects with a single remote myocardial infarction (MI). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0060759.gSecond, while it may be reasonable to assume that each individual has a constant global CRP mean over time, varying only randomly, it is also possible that homoeostatic imbalances cause this mean to shift slightly over days, weeks, or months. Variations could also most likely be due to some combination of these two effects. We therefore constructed a hierarchical model with five different time levels, wherein each individual was allowed to have his or her own mean that could also vary over each time interval. This model will provide conservative estimates of variability compared to a model that forces a fixed mean across time within each subject and which considers all variation to 
be purely random. This would imply that for each subject if an infinite number of readings were available at each time-point, the averages would be identical. This seems unrealistic and explains why we have chosen a hierarchical approach. Specifically, for each individual, the first level of the hierarchical model assume.
