Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25690491›Full record

ArticleCurrent medical research and opinion2015

Developing an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) for shared decision making.

Mark H Eckman, Ruth E Wise, Katherine Naylor, Lora Arduser, Gregory Y H Lip, Brett Kissela, Matthew Flaherty, Dawn Kleindorfer, Faisal Khan, Daniel P Schauer and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current medical research and opinion, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–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. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Shared Decision-Making as the Future of Emergency Cardiology.The Canadian journal of cardiology · 2018
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Mark H EckmanDivision of General Internal Medicine and the Center for Clinical Effectiveness, University of Cincinnati , Cincinnati, OH , USA.
Ruth E Wise
Katherine Naylor
Lora Arduser
Gregory Y H Lip
Brett Kissela
Matthew Flaherty
Dawn Kleindorfer
Faisal Khan
Daniel P Schauer
John Kues
Alexandru Costea

Funding

LCenter for Clinical and Translational Science and TrainingUL1TR001425 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI HEUBI, JAMES E., KISSELA, BRETT M · 2015 to 2024
$37.5M
Cincinnati Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences and TrainingUL1TR000077 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI · PI HEUBI, JAMES E., TSEVAT, JOEL · 2012 to 2014
$9.9M
NCATS NIH HHS 8UL1TR000077-05NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000077NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001425
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePatient values and preferences are an important component to decision making when tradeoffs exist that impact quality of life, such as tradeoffs between stroke prevention and hemorrhage in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) contemplating anticoagulant therapy. Our objective is to describe the development of an Atrial Fibrillation Guideline Support Tool (AFGuST) to assist the process of integrating patients' preferences into this decision. MATERIALS AND

methodsCHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED were used to calculate risks for stroke and hemorrhage. We developed a Markov decision analytic model as a computational engine to integrate patient-specific risk for stroke and hemorrhage and individual patient values for relevant outcomes in decisions about anticoagulant therapy.

resultsIndividual patient preferences for health-related outcomes may have greater or lesser impact on the choice of optimal antithrombotic therapy, depending upon the balance of patient-specific risks for ischemic stroke and major bleeding. These factors have been incorporated into patient-tailored booklets which, along with an informational video, were developed through an iterative process with clinicians and patient focus groups. KEY LIMITATIONS: Current risk prediction models for hemorrhage, such as the HAS-BLED, used in the AFGuST, do not incorporate all potentially significant risk factors. Novel oral anticoagulant agents recently approved for use in the United States, Canada, and Europe have not been included in the AFGuST. Rather, warfarin has been used as a conservative proxy for all oral anticoagulant therapy.

conclusionsWe present a proof of concept that a patient-tailored decision-support tool could bridge the gap between guidelines and practice by incorporating individual patient's stroke and bleeding risks and their values for major bleeding events and stroke to facilitate a shared decision making process. If effective, the AFGuST could be used as an adjunct to published guidelines to enhance patient-centered conversations about the anticoagulation management.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationDecision Making, Computer-AssistedHemorrhagePatient ParticipationWarfarinAgedAnticoagulantsDecision MakingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient PreferenceProgram DevelopmentQuality of LifeRisk AssessmentAnticoagulantsWarfarinAtrial fibrillationDecision analysisDecision support toolsShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID25690491
PMCPMC4708062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.