ArticleAmerican journal of medicine open2025
The Bad Reputation of Digoxin in Atrial Fibrillation-Causality or Bias? Nationwide Nested Case-Control Study.
Article in American journal of medicine open, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Studies have reported excess risk of mortality associated with digoxin in atrial fibrillation (AF).This study sought to investigate if these findings could be replicated and whether a potential association could be explained by bias. Methods: Using Danish Nationwide registers, a nested-case control study from 2012 to 2022 was conducted in a cohort of patients with AF. Cases were defined as death of any cause and the exposure was treatment with digoxin compared with beta blockers/verapamil. To investigate bias, additional analyses with negative control outcomes as case definitions-in which we would not expect a plausible association (eg, nursing home admission)-were employed. Associations were reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Results: A total of 59,748 cases were identified and matched 1:10 with controls (53% men, median age: 84 [IQR: 77-89]). Digoxin was associated with increased rates of mortality in the entire cohort (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.78-1.92) as well as subgroups such as patients with heart failure (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.65-2.06), diabetes (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.6-2.14), and kidney disease (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.04-1.8). Significant associations with all negative control outcomes were also found, most notably nursing home admissions (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.67-1.93). Conclusion: Digoxin use was associated with increased mortality in AF. However, negative control outcomes were also associated with digoxin use indicating that the described association between digoxin and mortality is likely not causal and being prescribed digoxin is merely a marker of more advanced disease and frailty.
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.