In AF, ABC scores predicted stroke or major bleeding better than CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED scores, respectively.

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.

1. Growth Differentiation Factor-15 Based ABC (Age, Biomarkers, Clinical History)-AF (Atrial Fibrillation)-Bleeding Risk Score for Elderly Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022
   Article
2. The ABC-Stroke Score Refines Stroke Risk Stratification in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation at the Emergency Department.Frontiers in medicine · 2022
   Article
3. Evaluation of ABC Bleeding Score and SAMe-TT2R2 Score on the Risk of Bleeding after Anticoagulation in Patients with Nonvalvular Atrial Fibrillation Complicated with Coronary Heart Disease.Contrast media & molecular imaging · 2022
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Performance of the ABC Scores for Assessing the Risk of Stroke or Systemic Embolism and Bleeding in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation in ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48.2019

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as