Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33462107›Full record

ArticleOpen heart2021

CHARGE-AF in a national routine primary care electronic health records database in the Netherlands: validation for 5-year risk of atrial fibrillation and implications for patient selection in atrial fibrillation screening.

Jelle C L Himmelreich, Wim A M Lucassen, Ralf E Harskamp, Claire Aussems, Henk C P M van Weert, Mark M J Nielen

Erratum issuedAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Open heart, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Initial heart rate score predicts new-onset atrial tachyarrhythmias in pacemaker patients.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 · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Jelle C L HimmelreichAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of General Practice, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands j.c.himmelreich@amsterdamumc.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-0430-1583
Wim A M LucassenAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of General Practice, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ralf E HarskampAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of General Practice, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Claire AussemsNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Henk C P M van WeertAmsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Department of General Practice, Amsterdam Public Health, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Mark M J NielenNetherlands Institute for Health Services Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo validate a multivariable risk prediction model (Cohorts for Heart and Aging Research in Genomic Epidemiology model for atrial fibrillation (CHARGE-AF)) for 5-year risk of atrial fibrillation (AF) in routinely collected primary care data and to assess CHARGE-AF's potential for automated, low-cost selection of patients at high risk for AF based on routine primary care data.

methodsWe included patients aged ≥40 years, free of AF and with complete CHARGE-AF variables at baseline, 1 January 2014, in a representative, nationwide routine primary care database in the Netherlands (Nivel-PCD). We validated CHARGE-AF for 5-year observed AF incidence using the C-statistic for discrimination, and calibration plot and stratified Kaplan-Meier plot for calibration. We compared CHARGE-AF with other predictors and assessed implications of using different CHARGE-AF cut-offs to select high-risk patients.

resultsAmong 111 475 patients free of AF and with complete CHARGE-AF variables at baseline (17.2% of all patients aged ≥40 years and free of AF), mean age was 65.5 years, and 53% were female. Complete CHARGE-AF cases were older and had higher AF incidence and cardiovascular comorbidity rate than incomplete cases. There were 5264 (4.7%) new AF cases during 5-year follow-up among complete cases. CHARGE-AF's C-statistic for new AF was 0.74 (95% CI 0.73 to 0.74). The calibration plot showed slight risk underestimation in low-risk deciles and overestimation of absolute AF risk in those with highest predicted risk. The Kaplan-Meier plot with categories <2.5%, 2.5%-5% and >5% predicted 5-year risk was highly accurate. CHARGE-AF outperformed CHA

conclusionIn patients with complete baseline CHARGE-AF data through routine Dutch primary care, CHARGE-AF accurately assessed AF risk among older primary care patients, outperformed both CHA

Indexed as

Patient SelectionAgedAtrial FibrillationData ManagementElectronic Health RecordsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMorbidityNetherlandsRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentStrokeTime Factorsatrial fibrillationelectronic health recordsepidemiologyrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID33462107
PMCPMC7816907

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.