ArticleClinical interventions in aging2025
The Validation of a Nomogram for Predicting Recurrence in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation Post-Ablation.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To utilize the developed nomogram for evaluating the risk of recurrence in non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) patients after radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) and compare the model's performance with the APPLE, ATLAS, and Antwerp scores. Patients and Methods: 242 patients with NVAF requiring RFCA were enrolled. These patients were randomly divided into a training cohort (n=169) and a validation cohort (n=73) according to 7:3. A nomogram was developed based on LAVI, RAVI, SII, NYHA classification, CHA Results: The nomogram achieved significantly higher values with an AUC of 0.837 (95% CI: 0.774-0.899) in the training cohort and 0.895 (95% CI: 0.823-0.968) in the validation cohort (all Conclusion: The APPLE, ATLAS, and Antwerp scores all demonstrated effectiveness in predicting AF recurrence after RFCA in patients with NVAF. Among these established scoring systems, the APPLE score showed better performance compared to the other two. More importantly, our newly developed nomogram exhibited superior performance compared to all three existing scores, demonstrating a marked improvement in predicting the risk of AF recurrence. While our model represents a promising tool, it is still in the preliminary stage and requires further validation in larger, multi-center, prospective cohorts to confirm its generalizability.
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.