ReviewCureus2025
Optimal Timing of Anticoagulation Initiation in Stroke Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Early versus late anticoagulation treatment after acute ischemic stroke with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review evaluates the optimal timing of anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. A comprehensive search across PubMed (94 records), Web of Science (121 records), Scopus (156 records), and the Cochrane Library (83 records) yielded 454 records. After screening 324 records and assessing 44 full texts, 13 studies were included: five randomized controlled trials and eight cohort studies, excluding those without comparisons of early versus delayed anticoagulation. The review analyzes studies comparing early and delayed initiation of oral anticoagulants (primarily direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) and warfarin), focusing on outcomes such as recurrent ischemic stroke, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH), and composite endpoints including recurrent stroke, sICH, systemic embolism, or mortality. Findings suggest that early anticoagulation, especially with DOACs, is safe and may reduce recurrent events without increasing the risk of sICH, particularly in cases with mild to moderate severity. However, varying definitions of timing, study designs, and limited data on severe strokes or in low-resource settings highlight research gaps. Future studies should investigate long-term outcomes and diverse populations to refine guidelines, particularly in resource-constrained environments.
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.