ReviewEuropean heart journal. Digital health2025
Explainable artificial intelligence for stroke risk stratification in atrial fibrillation.
Review in European heart journal. Digital health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- De-risking Atrial Fibrillation: Refining Anticoagulation Decision-Making.American journal of cardiovascular drugs : drugs, devices, and other interventions · 2026Review
- Quantifying lifetime risk for 1,401 infectious diseases across the diabetes spectrum using a Bayesian approach.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Stroke in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI): A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Current risk stratification tools can limit the optimal implementation of new and emerging therapies for patients with heart rhythm disorders. For example, stroke prevention treatments have outpaced means for stroke risk stratification for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Artificial intelligence (AI) techniques have shown promise for improving various tasks in cardiovascular medicine. Here, we explain key concepts in AI that are central to using these technologies for better risk stratification, highlighting one approach particularly well suited to the task of portable, personalized risk stratification-probabilistic graphical models (PGMs). Probabilistic graphical models can empower physicians to ask and answer a variety of clinical questions, which we demonstrate using a preliminary model of AF-related stroke risk among 1.6 million patients within the University of Utah Health System. This example also highlights the ability of PGMs to combine social determinants of health and other non-traditional variables with standard clinical and demographic ones to improve personalized risk predictions and address risk factor interactions. When combined with electronic health data, these computational technologies hold great promise to empower personalized, explainable, and equitable risk assessment.
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.