Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12375802›Full record

ReviewClinical cardiology2002

Anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation: why is the treatment rate so low?

Thomas A Buckingham, Robert Hatala

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical cardiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Self-monitoring and self-management of oral anticoagulation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding atrial fibrillation among primary care physicians: the potential role of postgraduate training.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2021
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Oral heparin: status review.Thrombosis journal · 2006
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Thomas A BuckinghamMedical Faculty, Comenius University, Institute of Pathophysiology, Bratislava, Slovak Republic. Tabuckingham@csi.com
Robert Hatala

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasing in many countries along with aging demographics. Atrial fibrillation is clearly associated with an increased rate of stroke. Numerous large clinical trials have shown that dose-adjusted warfarin can reduce the stroke rate in these patients, particularly in the elderly, and clear guidelines for the use of anticoagulants in such patients have been published. However, many studies show that treatment rates remain disappointingly low (< or = 50%). Numerous barriers to the use of dose-adjusted warfarin exist, including practical, patient-, physician-, and healthcare system-related barriers. These include the complex pharmacokinetics of warfarin, the need for continuous prothrombin time monitoring and dose adjustments, bleeding events, noncompliance, drug interactions, and increased costs of monitoring and therapy. Possible solutions to this problem are discussed and include improved patient and physician education, the use of anticoagulation clinics, new approaches to AF, and potential treatment improvements through use of newer anticoagulants.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationClinical Trials as TopicDose-Response Relationship, DrugHumansIncidenceRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesAnticoagulants

Identifiers

PMID12375802
PMCPMC6654570

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.