ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2023
Evaluation of Quantitative Decision-Making for Rhythm Management of Atrial Fibrillation Using Tabular Q-Learning.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2023. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Artificial intelligence in cardiovascular pharmacotherapy: applications and perspectives.European heart journal · 2025Review
- Reinforcement Learning and Its Clinical Applications Within Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Precision Medicine and Dynamic Treatment Regimes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Interpretable personalized surgical recommendation with joint consideration of multiple decisional dimensions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Strategies and Considerations for Safe Reinforcement Learning in Programming Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices.Medical research archives · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background Rhythm management is a complex decision for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although clinical trials have identified subsets of patients who might benefit from a given rhythm-management strategy, for individual patients it is not always clear which strategy is expected to have the greatest mortality benefit or durability. Methods and Results In this investigation 52 547 patients with a new atrial fibrillation diagnosis between 2010 and 2020 were retrospectively identified. We applied a type of artificial intelligence called tabular Q-learning to identify the optimal initial rhythm-management strategy, based on a composite outcome of mortality, change in treatment, and sustainability of the given treatment, termed the reward function. We first applied an unsupervised learning algorithm using a variational autoencoder with K-means clustering to cluster atrial fibrillation patients into 8 distinct phenotypes. We then fit a Q-learning algorithm to predict the best outcome for each cluster. Although rate-control strategy was most frequently selected by treating providers, the outcome was superior for rhythm-control strategies across all clusters. Subjects in whom provider-selected treatment matched the Q-table recommendation had fewer total deaths (4 [8.5%] versus 473 [22.4%], odds ratio=0.32,
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.