ArticleCJC open2025
Guideline Directed Anticoagulant Treatment and Dosing in a Contemporary Atrial Fibrillation Cohort: Analysis of the TRANSECT-AF Program.
Article in CJC open, 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Optimal thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF) requires the accurate application of modern clinical guidelines. We evaluated the point prevalence and factors associated with nonguideline-directed anticoagulation and direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing in Canadian patients with AF. Methods: TRANSECT-AF is a retrospective registry of consecutive Canadian patients with AF collected between March 2021 and August 2023. Patients were categorized as guideline directed therapy (GDT) or nonguideline-directed therapy (NGDT) based on concordance of their reported thromboprophylaxis with the CHADS-65 algorithm. Patients on GDT with a DOAC were subcategorized as concordant or discordant dosing based on concordance of their reported DOAC doses with the 2020 Canadian Cardiovascular Society AF dosing recommendations. Results: In total, 3043 patients were included (median age 77, 37% women, median CHADS-VASc score 4, median HAS-BLED score 2) and 11% received NGDT, which was independently associated with younger age, lower thromboembolic risk, better renal function, and antiplatelet therapy. Within the GDT cohort, 32% of patients were on guideline discordant DOAC doses. Older age, lower body mass index, female sex, lower renal function, higher thromboembolic risk and non-apixaban DOAC use were independently associated with discordant dosing. Conclusions: Within this Canadian AF registry, 11% of patients were on NGDT and 32% of patients on GDT with a DOAC were treated with a guideline-discordant dose. Our analysis describes predictors of guideline discordant anticoagulation and DOAC dosing that may be used to identify target populations for future quality improvement initiatives in AF thromboprophylaxis.
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.