ArticleJAMA network open2024
Physician Estimates and Patient-Reported Health Status in Atrial Fibrillation.
Article in JAMA network open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome System Implementation in Outpatient Cardiovascular Care: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2025Trial
- Clinician-assessed NYHA and EHRA symptom classifications only moderately reflect patient-reported quality of life in heart failure and atrial fibrillation.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2026Article
- Association of Atrial Fibrillation Symptom Burden With Social Determinants of Health.JACC. Advances · 2025Article
- Association between the baseline health status and long-term outcomes after catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation.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 · 2025Article
- Age and Health Status Benefits Following Initiation of Atrial Fibrillation-Specific Treatments.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Observational
- Article
- Current Strategies for Atrial Fibrillation Prevention and Management: Taming the Commonest Cardiac Arrhythmia.Current vascular pharmacology · 2025Review
- Bridging the educational gap: a pilot study of integrating patient-reported outcome into orthopedic residency training.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: A primary objective in managing atrial fibrillation (AF) is to optimize patients' health status, which can be done only if physicians accurately quantify the outcomes associated with AF in patients' lives. Objective: To explore physicians' estimation of the health status of patients with AF and its association with subsequent care and outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter, prospective cohort study was conducted in 2 outpatient practices in Tokyo, Japan. Participants included patients with newly diagnosed AF or those referred for initial treatment of AF at outpatient practices and treating physicians from November 8, 2018, to April 1, 2020. Data analysis was performed from December 22, 2022, to July 7, 2023. Exposures: Participating patients completed the Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life (AFEQT) questionnaire, a 20-item tool covering 4 domains with a 7-point Likert scale; 3 domains (symptoms, daily activities, and treatment concerns) were used in this study. Blinded to patients' responses, treating physicians answered a 3-item questionnaire quantifying each patient's AFEQT domain with a single item. Patients' mean Likert scale responses within each AFEQT domain were subtracted from the physicians' assessments so that higher scores (≥0.5 points) indicate physician underestimation, while lower scores (≤0.5 points) indicate physician overestimation of the health status of patients with AF. Main Outcomes and Measures: The independent association of physician-patient concordance with treatment escalation (alteration or initiation of antiarrhythmic drugs, cardioversion, or catheter ablation) and 1-year adjusted changes in AFEQT scores. Results: Among 330 patients (238 [72.1%] men; mean [SD] age, 67.9 [11.9] years; 163 [49.4%] with paroxysmal AF), physicians correctly estimated health status in 112 patients (33.9%), underestimated it in 42 patients (12.7%), and overestimated it in 176 patients (53.3%). Treatment escalation occurred in 63.6% of patients whose health status was correctly estimated, 47.6% of those whose health status was underestimated, and 66.3% of patients whose health status was overestimated. After multivariable adjustment, underestimation of health status was independently associated with less treatment escalation (adjusted odds ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.90) and less frequent AFEQT overall summary score improvement at 1 year (underestimated, 2.5 [95% CI, -1.6 to 6.7] vs correctly and overestimated health status, 8.4 [95% CI, 7.0-9.9] points; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, physician underestimation of the health status of patients with AF was common and associated with less aggressive treatment and less health status improvement at 1 year.
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.