ArticleCJC open2023
Managing With Atrial Fibrillation: An Exploratory Model-Based Cluster Analysis of Clinical and Personal Patient Characteristics.
Article in CJC open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Examining characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) has the potential to help in identifying groups of patients who might benefit from different management approaches. Methods: Secondary analysis of online survey data was combined with clinic referral data abstraction from 196 patients with AF attending an AF specialty clinic. Cluster analyses were performed to identify distinct, homogeneous clusters of AF patients defined by 11 relevant variables: CHA Results: Evidence emerged for both 2- and 4-cluster solutions. The 2-cluster solution involved a contrast between patients who were doing well on all variables (n = 129; 66%) vs those doing less well (n = 67; 34%). The 4-cluster solution provided a closer-up view of the data, showing that the group doing less well was split into 3 meaningfully different subgroups of patients who were managing in different ways. The final 4 clusters produced were as follows: (i) doing well; (ii) stressed and discontented; (iii) struggling and dissatisfied; and (iv) satisfied and complacent. Conclusions: Patients with AF can be accurately classified into distinct, natural groupings that vary in clinically important ways. Among the patients who were not managing well with AF, we found 3 distinct subgroups of patients who may benefit from tailored approaches to AF management and support. The tailoring of treatment approaches to specific personal and/or behavioural patterns, alongside clinical patterns, holds potential to improve patient outcomes (eg, treatment satisfaction).
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.