ReviewDrugs & aging2010
Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: putting the guidelines into practice.
Review in Drugs & aging, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Identification of Patients with Potential Atrial Fibrillation during Sinus Rhythm Using Isolated P Wave Characteristics from 12-Lead ECGs.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Characterizing major bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: a pharmacovigilance study of 27 467 patients taking rivaroxaban.Clinical cardiology · 2015Observational
- Outcome of coumarin-therapy in an outpatient setting over a 10-year period: coumarin-therapy in clinical practice.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation confers a 5-fold increase in risk of stroke. A number of drugs aimed at reducing this risk have been tested in randomized controlled trials. These include antiplatelet agents (singly and in combination); anticoagulants, including vitamin K antagonists and direct thrombin inhibitors; and anticoagulants with antiplatelet agents. Guidelines recommend that the choice of therapy should be determined by an assessment of underlying risk of stroke, with antiplatelet agents being indicated for people at low risk of stroke and anticoagulants for those at higher risk. The treatment decision is complicated by considerations of haemorrhage risk, with factors that increase risk of stroke also associated with increased risk of haemorrhage. Evidence from recent studies confirms that patients at high risk of stroke should be treated with anticoagulants, including elderly patients, provided that good international normalized ratio (INR) control can be maintained. Newer agents may enable a higher proportion of patients at high risk of stroke to be treated with anticoagulants than is currently the case. Decision making about people at moderate risk of stroke is less clear cut, and a choice of either an antiplatelet agent or an anticoagulant can be justified. For people at low risk of stroke, anticoagulation is not indicated.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.