Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28951401›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2017

Evolving landscape of stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation within the UK between 2012 and 2016: a cross-sectional analysis study using CPRD.

Laure Lacoin, Matthew Lumley, Essra Ridha, Marta Pereira, Laura McDonald, Sreeram Ramagopalan, Cinira Lefèvre, David Evans, Julian P Halcox

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Impact of oral anticoagulation on the association between frailty and clinical outcomes in people with atrial fibrillation: nationwide primary care records on treatment analysis.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2022
    Article
  12. Association between oral anticoagulants and COVID-19-related outcomes: a population-based cohort study.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

9 authors.

Laure LacoinUK Medical Department, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UK.
Matthew LumleyMedical Department, Pfizer, Tadworth, UK.
Essra RidhaUK Medical Department, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UK.
Marta PereiraReal-World Evidence, Evidera, London, UK.
Laura McDonaldReal-World Evidence, Evidera, London, UK.
Sreeram RamagopalanReal-World Evidence, Evidera, London, UK.
Cinira LefèvreCenter of Observational Research and Data Sciences, Business Insights and Analytics, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Rueil Malmaison, France.
David EvansWorldwide Health Economics & Outcomes Research, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Rueil Malmaison, France.
Julian P HalcoxDepartment of Cardiology, Swansea University, Cardiff, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6926-2947

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo describe the changes in prescribing of oral anticoagulant (AC) and antiplatelet (AP) agents in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) in the UK and to identify the characteristics associated with deviation from guideline-based recommendations.

designFive cross-sectional analyses in a large retrospective population-based cohort study.

settingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

participantsThe study included patients with a diagnosis of NVAF and eligible for anticoagulation (CHA

resultsThe proportion of patients being treated with AC increased at each index date, showing an absolute rise of 16.7% over the study period. At the same time, the proportion of patients treated with an AP alone was reduced by half, showing an absolute decrease of 16.8%. The proportion of patients not receiving any antithrombotic (AT) treatment remained the same across the study period. A number of predictors were identified for AP alone or no treatment compared with AC treatment.

conclusionMajor improvements in the AT management of patients with NVAF for stroke prevention in the UK were observed between April 2012 and January 2016. Despite this, nearly 20% of at-risk patients still received AP alone and over 15% were on no AT agents in January 2016.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualDrug PrescriptionsFemaleGeneral PracticeGuideline AdherenceHeart FailureHumansHypertensionIschemic Attack, TransientMalePlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAnticoagulantsPlatelet Aggregation Inhibitorsatrial fibrillationdrug therapyelectronic health recordsgreat britainstroke

Identifiers

PMID28951401
PMCPMC5623501

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.