ArticleBMJ open2017
Association between subjective risk perception and objective risk estimation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a cross-sectional study.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03061123 (Patient Perceptions and Physician Assessment of Benefits and Risks of Oral Anticoagulation Due to Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 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.
Patient Perceptions and Physician Assessment of Benefits and Risks of Oral Anticoagulation Due to Non-valvular Atrial Fibrillation
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Consistency between recurrent risk perception and objective recurrence risk in patients after atrial fibrillation ablation: a cross-sectional study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Article
- Cardiovascular disease risk perception among community adults in South China: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Associations among risk perception, health efficacy, and health behaviors for cardiovascular disease: an application of risk perception attitude framework.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Awareness of non-communicable diseases in women: a cross-sectional study.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
- Why do people take part in atrial fibrillation screening? Qualitative interview study in English primary care.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Differences in Perceived and Predicted Bleeding Risk in Older Adults With Atrial Fibrillation: The SAGE-AF Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- 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
- Association between knowledge and risk for cardiovascular disease among older adults: A cross-sectional study in China.International journal of nursing sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveOral anticoagulation (OAC) is state-of-the-art therapy for atrial fibrillation (AF), the most common arrhythmia worldwide. However, little is known about the perception of patients with AF and how it correlates with risk scores used by their physicians. Therefore, we correlated patients' estimates of their own stroke and bleeding risk with the objectively predicted individual risk using CHA
designCross-sectional prevalence study using convenience sampling and telephone follow-up. SETTINGS: Eight hospital departments and one general practitioner in Austria. Patients' perception of stroke and bleeding risk was opposed to commonly used risk scoring.
participantsPatients with newly diagnosed AF and indication for anticoagulation.
main outcome measuresComparison of subjective risk perception with CHA
resultsNinety-one patients (age 73±11 years, 45% female) were included in this study. Subjective stroke and bleeding risk estimation did not correlate with risk scores (ρ=0.08 and ρ=0.17). The majority of patients (57%) underestimated the individual stroke risk. Patients feared stroke more than bleeding (67% vs 10%). There was no relationship between accurate perception of stroke and bleeding risks and education level. However, we found a correlation between the patients' judgement of their own knowledge of AF and correct assessment of individual stroke risk (ρ=0.24, p=0.02). During follow-up, patients experienced the following events: death (n=5), stroke (n=2), bleeding (n=1). OAC discontinuation rate despite indication was 3%.
conclusionsIn this cross-sectional analysis of OAC-naive patients with AF, we found major differences between patients' perceptions and physicians' assessments of risks and benefits of OAC. To ensure shared decision-making and informed consent, more attention should be given to evidence-based and useful communication strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03061123.
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.