ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2023
General practitioners' perceptions on opportunistic single-time point screening for atrial fibrillation: A European quantitative survey.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Key stakeholder views on atrial fibrillation screening: a systematic mixed-studies review and interpretive analysis.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 · 2026Pooled it
- Australian key stakeholder views regarding implementation of atrial fibrillation screening: a qualitative evaluation.BMJ open · 2026Article
- Article
- Screening and detection of atrial fibrillation in primary care: current practice and future perspectives.European heart journal supplements : journal of the European Society of Cardiology · 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
21 authors at 14 institutions in 9 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: There is no clear guidance on how to implement opportunistic atrial fibrillation (AF) screening in daily clinical practice. Objectives: This study evaluated the perception of general practitioners (GPs) about value and practicalities of implementing screening for AF, focusing on opportunistic single-time point screening with a single-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) device. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with a survey developed to assess overall perception concerning AF screening, feasibility of opportunistic single-lead ECG screening and implementation requirements and barriers. Results: A total of 659 responses were collected (36.1% Eastern, 33.4% Western, 12.1% Southern, 10.0% Northern Europe, 8.3% United Kingdom & Ireland). The perceived need for standardized AF screening was rated as 82.7 on a scale from 0 to 100. The vast majority (88.0%) indicated no AF screening program is established in their region. Three out of four GPs (72.1%, lowest in Eastern and Southern Europe) were equipped with a 12-lead ECG, while a single-lead ECG was less common (10.8%, highest in United Kingdom & Ireland). Three in five GPs (59.3%) feel confident ruling out AF on a single-lead ECG strip. Assistance through more education (28.7%) and a tele-healthcare service offering advice on ambiguous tracings (25.2%) would be helpful. Preferred strategies to overcome barriers like insufficient (qualified) staff, included integrating AF screening with other healthcare programs (24.9%) and algorithms to identify patients most suitable for AF screening (24.3%). Conclusion: GPs perceive a strong need for a standardized AF screening approach. Additional resources may be required to have it widely adopted into clinical practice.
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.