ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2024
Subclinical Atrial Fibrillation: To Anticoagulate or Not?
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2024. 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.
- Left atrial appendage occlusion in patients with cancer.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) carries a stroke risk, often necessitating anticoagulation, especially in patients with risk factors. With the advent of implantable and wearable heart monitors, episodes of short bouts of atrial arrhythmias called atrial high-rate episodes (AHREs) or subclinical AF (SCAF) are commonly identified. The necessity of anticoagulation in patients with SCAF is unclear. However, recent randomized controlled trials, the NOAH-AFNET 6 and ARTESIA, have offered insights into this matter. Furthermore, a study-level meta-analysis combining data from both these trials has provided more detailed information. Reviewing the information thus far, we can conclude that DOACs can result in a notable reduction in the risk of ischemic stroke and can potentially decrease the risk of debilitating stroke, albeit with an increased risk of major bleeding. Thus, informed, shared decision-making is essential, weighing the potential benefits of stroke prevention against the risk of major bleeding when considering anticoagulation in this patient population.
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.