SynthesisEuropean journal of preventive cardiology2021
Utility of risk prediction models to detect atrial fibrillation in screened participants.
Synthesis in European journal of preventive cardiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prediction of incident atrial fibrillation in community-based electronic health records: a systematic review with meta-analysis.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- [The role of psychosocial risk factors in the development and course of atrial fibrillation].Herzschrittmachertherapie & Elektrophysiologie · 2026Review
- Article
- Integrating wearables into the modern electrophysiology practice: A proposed framework for the use of wearables and creation of a remote digital clinic.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Proteomic Signatures for Risk Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation.Circulation · 2025Article
- Epidemiology, prognosis, and challenges in the management of hyperthyroidism-related atrial fibrillation.European thyroid journal · 2024Review
- Step Count, Self-reported Physical Activity, and Predicted 5-Year Risk of Atrial Fibrillation: Cross-sectional Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- CHARGE-AF: A Useful Score For Atrial Fibrillation Prediction?Current cardiology reviews · 2023Article
- Analyses of m6A regulatory genes and subtype classification in atrial fibrillation.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2023Article
- Short-term prediction of atrial fibrillation from ambulatory monitoring ECG using a deep neural network.European heart journal. Digital health · 2022Article
- Article
- Joint Associations Between Body Mass Index and Waist Circumference With Atrial Fibrillation in Men and Women.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsAtrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with higher risk of stroke. While the prevalence of AF is low in the general population, risk prediction models might identify individuals for selective screening of AF. We aimed to systematically identify and compare the utility of established models to predict prevalent AF. METHODS AND
resultsSystematic search of PubMed and EMBASE for risk prediction models for AF. We adapted established risk prediction models and assessed their predictive performance using data from 2.5M individuals who attended vascular screening clinics in the USA and the UK and in the subset of 1.2M individuals with CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2. We assessed discrimination using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curves and agreement between observed and predicted cases using calibration plots. After screening 6959 studies, 14 risk prediction models were identified. In our cohort, 10 464 (0.41%) participants had AF. For discrimination, six prediction model had AUROC curves of 0.70 or above in all individuals and those with CHA2DS2-VASc ≥2. In these models, calibration plots showed very good concordance between predicted and observed risks of AF. The two models with the highest observed prevalence in the highest decile of predicted risk, CHARGE-AF and MHS, showed an observed prevalence of AF of 1.6% with a number needed to screen of 63. Selective screening of the 10% highest risk identified 39% of cases with AF.
conclusionPrediction models can reliably identify individuals at high risk of AF. The best performing models showed an almost fourfold higher prevalence of AF by selective screening of individuals in the highest decile of risk compared with systematic screening of all cases. REGISTRATION: This systematic review was registered (PROSPERO CRD42019123847).
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.