ArticleEuropean heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes2022
What is next for screening for undiagnosed atrial fibrillation? Artificial intelligence may hold the key.
Article in European heart journal. Quality of care & clinical outcomes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Prediction of Atrial Fibrillation From the ECG in the Community Using Deep Learning: A Multinational Study.Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology · 2025Article
- Temporal Relationship-Aware Treadmill Exercise Test Analysis Network for Coronary Artery Disease Diagnosis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasingly common, though often undiagnosed, leaving many people untreated and at elevated risk of ischaemic stroke. Current European guidelines do not recommend systematic screening for AF, even though a number of studies have shown that periods of serial or continuous rhythm monitoring in older people in the general population increase detection of AF and the prescription of oral anticoagulation. This article discusses the conflicting results of two contemporary landmark trials, STROKESTOP and the LOOP, which provided the first evidence on whether screening for AF confers a benefit for people in terms of clinical outcomes. The benefit and efficiency of systematic screening for AF in the general population could be optimized by targeting screening to only those at higher risk of developing AF. For this purpose, evidence is emerging that prediction models developed using artificial intelligence in routinely collected electronic health records can provide strong discriminative performance for AF and increase detection rates when combined with rhythm monitoring in a clinical study. We consider future directions for investigation in this field and how this could be best aligned to the current evidence base to target screening in people at elevated risk of stroke.
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.