ArticleThe American journal of medicine2012
Impact of the CHA2DS2-VASc score on anticoagulation recommendations for atrial fibrillation.
Article in The American journal of medicine, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Cerebrovascular and Bleeding Outcomes of Warfarin versus Direct Oral Anticoagulants Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Neurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2026Pooled it
- Guideline
- Predictive value of critical illness scores for outcomes of patients with community-acquired pneumonia: analysis of critical care data from the MIMIC-IV database.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2026Article
- Variation in Telehealth Use for Patients With Incident Atrial Fibrillation Across the Veterans Health Administration: Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Evaluating artificial intelligence-enabled medical tests in cardiology: Best practice.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2025Review
- Description of a National Cohort of Patients With Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Devices.Cureus · 2025Article
- Article
- Challenges in Coagulation Management in Neurosurgical Diseases: A Scoping Review, Development, and Implementation of Coagulation Management Strategies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Non-Pharmacological Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Review
- CHA2DS2-VASc score as an independent outcome predictor in patients hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke.PloS one · 2022Article
- The relationship between incomplete surgical obliteration of the left atrial appendage and thromboembolic events after mitral valve surgery (from the ISOLATE Registry).Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2021Article
- Beyond CHA2DS2-VASc for Predicting the Risk of Thromboembolism and Stroke - Not That Simple!Arquivos brasileiros de cardiologia · 2021Article
- Article
- Self-reported risk of stroke and factors associated with underestimation of stroke risk among older adults with atrial fibrillation: the SAGE-AF study.Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC · 2020Article
- Prevalence and risk factors of left atrial thrombus in patients with atrial fibrillation and lower class (IIa) recommendation to anticoagulants.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2020Article
- Spontaneous and Severe Haematomas in Patients with COVID-19 on Low- Molecular-Weight Heparin for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and heart failure: Insights from the NCDR PINNACLE-AF registry.Clinical cardiology · 2019Article
- Sex Differences in Atrial Fibrillation-Update on Risk Assessment, Treatment, and Long-Term Risk.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018Review
- Atrial Fibrillation Ablation and its Impact on Stroke.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥ 75 years, Diabetes mellitus, Stroke (CHADS(2)) score is used to predict the need for oral anticoagulation for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation. The Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age ≥ 75 years, Diabetes mellitus, Stroke, Vascular disease, Age 65-74 years, Sex category (CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc) schema has been proposed as an improvement. Our objective is to determine how adoption of the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score alters anticoagulation recommendations.
methodsBetween 2004 and 2008, 1664 patients were seen at the University of Virginia Atrial Fibrillation Center. We calculated the CHADS(2) and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores for each patient. The 2006 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society guidelines for atrial fibrillation management were used to determine anticoagulation recommendations based on the CHADS(2) score, and the 2010 European Society of Cardiology guidelines were used to determine anticoagulation recommendations based on the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score.
resultsThe average age was 62±13 years, and 34% were women. Average CHADS(2) and CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc scores were 1.1±1.1 and 1.8±1.5, respectively (P<.0001). The CHADS(2) score classified 33% as requiring oral anticoagulation. The CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score classified 53% as requiring oral anticoagulation. For women, 31% had a CHADS(2) score ≥ 2, but 81% had a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score ≥ 2 (P = .0001). Also, 32% of women with a CHADS(2) score of zero had a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score ≥ 2. For men, 25% had a CHADS(2) score ≥ 2, but 39% had a CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score ≥ 2 (P<.0001).
conclusionCompared with the CHADS(2) score, the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASc score more clearly defines anticoagulation recommendations. Many patients, particularly older women, are redistributed from the low- to high-risk categories.
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.