ArticleNetherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation2017
Current practice of Dutch cardiologists in detecting and diagnosing atrial fibrillation: results of an online case vignette study.
Article in Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- How is atrial fibrillation detected in everyday healthcare? Results of a Dutch cohort study.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2023Article
- How do Dutch general practitioners detect and diagnose atrial fibrillation? Results of an online case vignette study.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- CHA2DS2-VASc score can guide the screening of atrial fibrillation - cross-sectional study in a geriatric ward.Clinical interventions in aging · 2019Article
- Clinical electrophysiology in the Netherlands: where do we stand?Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDetection of atrial fibrillation (AF) is important given the risk of complications, such as stroke and heart failure, and the need for preventive measures. Detection is complicated because AF can be silent or paroxysmal. Describing current practice may give clues to improve AF detection. The aim of this study was to describe how cardiologists currently detect AF.
methodsBetween December 2014 and May 2015, we sent Dutch cardiologists an online questionnaire. Firstly, we asked which tools for detection of AF their department has. Secondly, we presented six case vignettes related to AF, in which they could choose a diagnostic tool. Thirdly, we compared the results with current guidelines.
resultsWe approached 90 cardiology departments and 48 (53%) completed the questionnaire. In asymptomatic patients with risk factors according to CHA
conclusionDutch cardiologists have access to a wide variety of ambulatory arrhythmia monitoring tools. Nearly half of the cardiologists would perform opportunistic screening. In cases with non-frequent symptoms, monitoring duration was shorter than recommended by NICE.
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.