Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40842182›Full record

Trial reportEuropace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology2025

Systematic, randomized atrial fibrillation screening using detailed phenotyping with a risk prediction model combined with patch electrocardiogram in a Swedish population aged 65 years or older: the CONSIDERING-AF trial.

Emelie Rakai, Farzaneh Etminani, Ninia Younan, Anton Andersson, Maria Andersson, Torbjörn Vik, Stefan Kunkel, Anna Sundin, Johan Holm, Angelo Modica and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Digital recruitment and prevalence of screen-detected atrial fibrillation in nationwide patch-based ECG screening: the NORSCREEN randomized clinical trial.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Trial
  2. Population reach and participation rate in opportunistic vs. systematic atrial fibrillation screening: STROKESTOP III.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Trial
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Emelie RakaiDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd University Hospital, Entrévägen 2, 182 88 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0005-8802-9039
Farzaneh EtminaniResearch and Innovation Centre, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2006-6229
Ninia YounanDepartment of Medicine, Halland Hospital Varberg, Varberg, Sweden, Träslövsvägen 68, 432 81 Varberg, Sweden.
Anton AnderssonDepartment of Medicine, Halland Hospital Varberg, Varberg, Sweden, Träslövsvägen 68, 432 81 Varberg, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0007-8126-716X
Maria AnderssonResearch and Innovation Centre, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.
Torbjörn VikDepartment of Medicine, Halland Hospital Varberg, Varberg, Sweden, Träslövsvägen 68, 432 81 Varberg, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0009-5013-3833
Stefan KunkelResearch and Innovation Centre, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0004-1211-1936
Anna SundinBristol Myers Squibb AB, Solna, Sweden.
Johan HolmPfizer AB, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-6398-7672
Angelo ModicaPfizer AB, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0009-0001-3639-7084
Helena M LingeResearch and Innovation Centre, Region Halland, Halmstad, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-8919-0300
Purvee ParikhMedical Affairs, Ambulatory Monitoring and Diagnostics, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA.
Manish WadhwaMedical Affairs, Ambulatory Monitoring and Diagnostics, Philips, San Diego, CA, USA.ORCID 0009-0003-3366-5623
Johan EngdahlDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd University Hospital, Entrévägen 2, 182 88 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1677-7215
Emma SandgrenDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd University Hospital, Entrévägen 2, 182 88 Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-7410-3246

Funding

Bristol Myers SquibbPfizer Alliance
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsAtrial fibrillation (AF), often asymptomatic and underdiagnosed, is an independent risk factor for ischaemic stroke. A knowledge gap remains regarding the optimal target population and method to use for AF screening. We aimed to test whether screening for AF using a machine learning-based risk prediction model (RPM) and 14-day continuous patch electrocardiogram (ECG) (Philips ePatch) in high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years is more effective than standard care. METHODS AND

resultsIndividuals ≥ 65 years were assigned to general or RPM cohort. The general cohort was randomized to control or invitation. In the RPM cohort, high-risk individuals, identified by RPM, were randomized to control or invitation. The primary outcome was 6-month AF incidence, analysed as intention-to-invite, comparing RPM + invitation with general + control. Of the 2960 randomized individuals, participation was 43% (632/1480) in invitation arms. Atrial fibrillation incidence was higher in RPM + invitation than in general + control arm (3.8%, 28/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P < 0.001), yielding a risk ratio of 5.6, [95% confidence interval (2.2, 14.4)], and a number needed to invite of 32. Atrial fibrillation was more often detected in RPM + invitation than in general + invitation arm (1.1%, 8/740; P < 0.001), but not more often than in RPM + control arm (2.2%, 16/740; P = 0.07). No difference was found between general + invitation and general + control arms (1.1%, 8/740 vs. 0.7%, 5/740; P = 0.40).

conclusionAmong high-risk individuals ≥ 65 years, the combination of a machine learning-based RPM and long-term ECG recording was superior to standard care in identifying new AF cases.

Indexed as

Atrial FibrillationElectrocardiographyMachine LearningMass ScreeningAgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsFemaleHumansIncidenceMalePhenotypePredictive Value of TestsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSwedenAtrial fibrillationIschaemic strokeLong-term ECG recordingMachine learningScreening

Identifiers

PMID40842182
PMCPMC13223732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.