Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2018
Variation in anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation between English clinical commissioning groups: an observational study.
Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- A pilot study of the quality of care of atrial fibrillation in Irish general practice.Family practice · 2024Observational
- Current Anticoagulation Statuses among Older Chinese People with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Article
- Anticoagulation trends in adults aged 65 years and over with atrial fibrillation: a cohort study.Open heart · 2021Article
- Prescription of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelets for stroke prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation: nationwide time series ecological 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 · 2020Article
- Trends in anticoagulant prescribing: a review of local policies in English primary care.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Atrial fibrillation and stroke prevention: where we are and where we should be.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite improvement in anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation (AF), substantial variation in anticoagulation persists between clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) and regions in England.
aimTo identify reasons for variation between English CCGs in anticoagulation for AF. DESIGN AND
settingA 4-year observational study from 2012/2013 to 2015/2016, of the national Quality and Outcomes Framework.
methodMultiple regression and Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to analyse anticoagulation for AF in relation to older age, Index of Multiple Deprivation, prescription of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs), and exception reporting, as well as stroke hospital admission and mortality.
resultsThe proportion of eligible patients in England prescribed anticoagulants for AF without exceptions for clinical complexity or patient dissent increased from 65.1% in 2012/2013 to 77.9% in 2015/2016. In 2015, 290 920 additional eligible people were anticoagulated in association with use of the CHA
conclusionAnticoagulation for AF has improved substantially in England in association with considerable increases in the eligible population as a result of decreased exception reporting and the use of the CHA
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.