ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Integrated management of atrial fibrillation and comorbidities in the community: a generalist-specialist collaborative RCT and subgroup analysis.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop, implement, and evaluate a community-based, patient-centered integrated care model for atrial fibrillation (AF) characterized by generalist-specialist collaboration and cardio-cerebrovascular co-management, and to examine whether its effectiveness varies across key patient subgroups. Methods: A prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted. Between June 2024 and May 2025, 160 patients with AF were consecutively enrolled from the Shanghai Weifang Community Health Service Center and Renji Hospital, affiliated to Shanghai Jiao Tong University, School of Medicine. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or an intervention group, with 80 patients in each. The intervention group received comprehensive management based on a collaborative framework between general practitioners (GPs) and specialists. The control group received routine community-based chronic disease management and follow-up. After a 12-month intervention period, outcomes were compared between the two groups, including the attainment rates for body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, and blood glucose control; levels of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP); left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF); standardized anticoagulation and heart rate control medication use; and the primary composite endpoint (heart failure or stroke). Subgroup analyses were prespecified for age (<75 vs. ≥75 years), sex, and CHA Results: A total of 150 patients completed the 12-month follow-up, with 75 patients in each group. The intervention group demonstrated significantly higher attainment rates for BMI, blood pressure, and blood glucose control compared to the control group. Regarding cardiac function, LVEF showed significant improvement in the intervention group, whereas no significant difference was observed in NT-proBNP levels between the groups. Furthermore, the standardized usage rates for both anticoagulant and heart rate control medications were significantly higher in the intervention group. For primary endpoint events, the incidence of the composite outcome (heart failure or stroke) was significantly lower in the intervention group. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant interactions for age ( Conclusion: The generalist-specialist collaborative integrated care model effectively improves risk factor control, cardiac function, and treatment standardization, and reduces major adverse cardiovascular events in community-dwelling AF patients. The benefits are consistent across age, sex, and comorbidity burden subgroups, supporting its broad applicability in primary care settings.
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.