ArticleClinical cardiology2017
Incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: An Asian multicenter retrospective cohort study in Singapore.
Article in Clinical cardiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Atrial Fibrillation Detected by Handheld ECG and Ischemic Stroke Risk in a 55- to 64-Year-Old Chinese Population.JACC. Asia · 2025Article
- Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: the Singapore story.Singapore medical journal · 2020Article
- Incidence of thromboembolic and bleeding events in patients with newly diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: An Asian multicenter retrospective cohort study in Singapore.Clinical cardiology · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReal-world effectiveness and safety of antithrombotics in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients in Singapore has not been thoroughly studied. HYPOTHESIS: Users of various antithrombotics experience a significantly different risk of stroke and major bleed compared with warfarin users.
methodsThis multicenter retrospective cohort study included patients age ≥ 21 years newly diagnosed with NVAF between July 2012 and September 2015. Using electronic medical records, data on patients' demographics, antithrombotics prescribed, and CHA
resultsOf 743 patients included, 224 were on warfarin, 156 on direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), 277 on single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT), 28 on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), and 58 on no therapy. Mean age (±SD) was 68.7 ± 13.0 years. Compared with warfarin users, SAPT (adjusted [adj.] HR: 3.70, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-11.3) and DAPT users (adj. HR: 10.1, 95% CI: 1.51-67.2) were more likely to develop thromboembolic outcomes. Also, DOAC users (adj. HR: 0.304, 95% CI: 0.158-0.585), SAPT users (adj. HR: 0.142, 95% CI: 0.0680-0.295), and DAPT users (adj. HR: 0.112, 95% CI: 0.0146-0.857) were less likely to experience any bleed compared with warfarin users.
conclusionsSAPT and DAPT are less effective than warfarin in NVAF patients. DOACs may be considered in view of lower risk of overall bleed.
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.