ArticleJournal of geriatric cardiology : JGC2025
Predicting survival in atrial fibrillation: results from SAGE-AF.
Article in Journal of geriatric cardiology : JGC, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Using Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements in Atrial Fibrillation (SAGE-AF) data, determine how well the rich mix of demographic, clinical history, geriatric assessments, and clinically adjudicated events can predict two-year survival. Methods: Subjects were recruited from participating outpatient practices if they had non-valvular AF, were 65 or over with CHA Results: The 1245 subjects experienced 1960 events, primarily hospitalizations (935) and/or bleeding (817); 114 subjects (9.2%) died during two years of follow-up. Events initially abstracted to more than one category (172) were combined, resulting in 1788 unique incidents. Most subjects had zero or one event (69%) and fewer than 7% had more than 3 types. Most variables were significant in bivariate analysis. Using multiple logistic regression with two-year survival as the outcome variable, the best-fit model included event number and type, number of unique incidents, and number of bleeding events (R Conclusions: Two-year survival was high. This model, if validated, could have major implications for treatment of patients with AF. Patients in the large group with no or one event are at very low risk of death (under 2%). The small group with high risk for further complications, including death, deserve reassessment to determine if this trajectory can be altered.
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.