ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2022
Use of thromboprophylaxis guidelines and risk stratification tools in atrial fibrillation: A survey of general practitioners in Australia.
Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Role of Ferroptosis in Atrial Fibrillation: A Promising Future.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- A Survey of Saudi General Practitioners on the Use of Thromboprophylaxis Guidelines and Risk Assessment Tools in Atrial Fibrillation.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Use of thromboprophylaxis guidelines and risk stratification tools in atrial fibrillation: A survey of general practitioners in Australia.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Research progress on the role of ferroptosis in cardiovascular disease.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
RATIONALE AND
objectivesClinical guidelines produced by cardiology societies (henceforth referred to simply as 'clinical guidelines') recommend thromboprophylaxis with oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who have moderate-to-high stroke risk. However, deviations from these recommendations are observed, especially in the primary healthcare setting. The primary aims of this study were to evaluate the self-reported use of AF clinical guidelines and risk stratification tools among Australian general practitioners (GPs), and their perceptions regarding the available resources.
methodWe conducted an online survey of Australian GPs. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise the findings.
resultsResponses from 115 GPs were included for analysis. Respondents reported various ways of accessing thromboprophylaxis-related information (n = 113), including clinical guidelines (13.3%), 'Therapeutic Guidelines
conclusionAmong our small sample of Australian GPs, most did not access thromboprophylaxis-related information directly from AF-specific clinical guidelines developed by cardiology societies. Although the majority reported using formal stroke and bleeding assessment tools, these were typically used on OAC initiation only. More focus is needed on formal risk reassessment as clinically indicated and at regular review.
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.