ArticleJAMA cardiology2019
Association Between Warfarin Control Metrics and Atrial Fibrillation Outcomes in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in JAMA cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Warfarin-Associated Bleeding and Thromboembolic Events in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Pooled it
- Anticoagulation quality through time in therapeutic range in Sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Machine learning for predicting thrombotic recurrence in antiphospholipid syndrome.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Substance Use in Adolescents in Three Independent Worldwide Cohorts: Algorithm Development and Validation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Clinical Predictors of Warfarin Response Among Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Evidence from the Middle Eastern JoFib Study.Current vascular pharmacology · 2025Observational
- SAIL study of stroke, systemic embolism and bleeding outcomes with warfarin anticoagulation in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (SEuropean heart journal open · 2023Article
- Anticoagulation control, outcomes, and associated factors in long-term-care patients receiving warfarin in Africa: a systematic review.Thrombosis journal · 2022Review
- Big Data and Atrial Fibrillation: Current Understanding and New Opportunities.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Bleeding and thrombotic events (eg, stroke and systemic embolism) are common in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) taking warfarin sodium despite a well-established therapeutic range. Objective: To evaluate whether history of therapeutic warfarin control in patients with AF is independently associated with subsequent bleeding or thrombotic events. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter cohort study of 176 primary care, cardiology, and electrophysiology clinics in the United States, data were obtained during 51 830 visits among 10 137 patients with AF in the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of Atrial Fibrillation (ORBIT-AF) Registry; 5545 patients treated with warfarin were included in the bleeding analysis, and 5635 patients were included in the thrombotic event analysis. Patient follow-up was performed from June 29, 2010, to November 30, 2014. Data analysis was performed from August 4, 2016, to February 15, 2019. Exposures: Multiple measures of warfarin control within the preceding 6 months were analyzed: time in therapeutic range of 2.0 to 3.0, most recent international normalized ratio (INR), percentage of time that a patient had interpolated INR values less than 2.0 or greater than 3.0, INR variance, INR range, and percentage of INR values in therapeutic range. Main Outcomes and Measures: Association of INR measures, alone or in combination, with clinical factors and risk for thrombotic events and bleeding during the subsequent 6 months was assessed post hoc using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 5545 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.5 [9.8] years; 3184 [57.4%] male) with AF were included in the major bleeding analysis and 5635 patients (mean [SD] age, 74.5 [9.8] years; 3236 [57.4%] male) in the thrombotic event analysis. During a median follow-up of 1.5 years (interquartile range, 1.0-2.5 years), there were 339 major bleeds (6.1%) and 51 strokes (0.9%). Multiple metrics of warfarin control were individually associated with subsequent bleeding. After adjustment for clinical bleeding risk, 3 measures-time in therapeutic range (per 1-SD increase ≤55: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.16; 95% CI, 1.02-1.32), variation in INR values (aOR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.19-1.47), and maximum INR (aOR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.10-1.31)-remained associated with bleeding risk. Adding INR variance to a clinical risk model slightly increased the C statistic from 0.68 to 0.69 and had a net reclassification improvement index of 0.028 (95% CI, -0.029 to 0.067). No INR measures were associated with subsequent stroke risk. Conclusions and Relevance: Three metrics of prior warfarin control were associated with bleeding risk but only marginally more so than traditional clinical factors. This study did not identify any measures of INR control that were significantly associated with stroke risk.
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.