ReviewKorean circulation journal2021
Stroke and Bleeding Risk Assessment in Atrial Fibrillation: Where Are We Now?
Review in Korean circulation journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- 2021 Focused Update Consensus Guidelines of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society on Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation: Executive Summary.Thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Guideline
- A Review of Emerging Biomarkers Connecting Diabetes and Ischemic Stroke: Implications for Early Detection and Risk Stratification.Journal of diabetes research · 2026Review
- Analysis of Risk Factors for Hemorrhagic Transformation of Cerebral Infarction and Recurrence of Cerebral Infarction: A Retrospective Study on Cerebral Infarction Patients with or without Hemorrhagic Transformation.International journal of general medicine · 2025Article
- Machine Learning for Predicting Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence After Cardioversion: A Modest Leap Forward.Korean circulation journal · 2023Article
- The Empire Strikes Back?Korean circulation journal · 2023Article
- Virtual Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: An Unexplored Niche.Korean circulation journal · 2022Article
- 2021 Focused update of the 2017 consensus guidelines of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) on stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most important international guidelines recommend the use of CHA₂DS₂-VASc and HAS-BLED scores for stroke and bleeding risk assessments in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients, respectively. The 2020 AF guidelines of European Society of Cardiology have revised the definition of "C: congestive heart failure (HF)" component, and now patients with either HF with reduced ejection fraction or preserved ejection fraction should be assigned 1 point. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy was also included. Besides, the revised "V: vascular diseases" component included both prior myocardial infarction and "angiographically significant coronary artery disease". It is important to understand that the stroke and bleeding risks of AF patients were not static and should be re-assessed regularly. A high HAS-BLED score itself should not be the only reason to withhold or discontinue oral anticoagulants, but remind physicians for the corrections of modifiable bleeding risk factors and more regular follow up. In the future, the AF duration and left atrial function may play an important role for personalized evaluation of individual stroke risk while more studies are necessary.
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.