Trial reportQJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians2025
Risk-based screening for the evaluation of atrial fibrillation in general practice (R-BEAT): a randomized cross-over trial.
Trial report in QJM : monthly journal of the Association of Physicians, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03911986 (Risk-Based Screening for the Evaluation of Atrial Fibrillation Trial), which is not on this 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.
Risk-Based Screening for the Evaluation of Atrial Fibrillation Trial (R-BEAT)
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A study of the clinical usefulness of the eMEMO®.Journal of arrhythmia · 2025Article
- The Impact of Cardiovascular Diseases on Postoperative Complications in Orthopedic Trauma Patients.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Asymptomatic atrial fibrillation patients: DOAC or don't?The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Article
- Yonder: Screening for atrial fibrillation, antibiotics in care homes, hand, foot, and mouth disease, and asthma triple therapy.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 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
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal approach to the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation in primary care is unclear.
aimTo determine if external loop recorder (ELR) screening improves atrial fibrillation detection in community-dwelling adults with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of greater than two.
designRandomized cross-over clinical trial.
methodsCommunity-dwelling adults ≥55 years with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of greater than two, who were deemed suitable for atrial fibrillation screening and oral anticoagulation by their general practitioner were randomly assigned to immediate or delayed ELR monitoring. The intervention period was ELR cardiac monitoring for 1 week and the usual care period was healthcare professional pulse screening and completion of electrocardiogram (ECG) or cardiac rhythm strip if pulse was identified as irregular.
resultsOf the 488 participants randomized, 244 were assigned to the immediate monitoring period (intervention) and 244 were assigned to the delayed monitoring period. Mean (SD) age was 75.0 (7.0) years and 333 participants were women (68%). Atrial fibrillation was detected in 32 of 488 participants (6.6%) in the intervention period versus five of 488 (1%) in the usual care period (absolute difference, 5.53% (3.2-7.9%), P < 0.001; number needed to screen 15 (11-23)). Twelve cases (37.5%) of ELR-detected atrial fibrillation were greater than 24 h in duration. Oral anticoagulation was initiated in all participants (n = 32).
conclusionsAmong older community-dwelling adults with a CHA2DS2-VASc score of greater than two, screening with ELR for one week was associated with a 5.5% incremental detection of new atrial fibrillation over usual care.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Register: NCT03911986.
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.