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 Cardiology2026
Population reach and participation rate in opportunistic vs. systematic atrial fibrillation screening: STROKESTOP III.
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, 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsPopulation-based screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) should be considered in elderly individuals to enable AF detection. However, participation in systematic screening programmes is often suboptimal. STROKESTOP III evaluated whether opportunistic screening could improve participation compared with systematic screening. METHODS AND
resultsSTROKESTOP III is a cluster-randomized trial including individuals aged 75-76 years from 16 primary care centres in Region Värmland, Sweden. Centres were randomized to systematic screening, using mailed invitations, or opportunistic screening, using invitations during visits.In the systematic arm, 1312 individuals were eligible and invited, of whom 607 participated (46.3%). In the opportunistic arm, 1390 individuals attended participating primary care centres and were potentially eligible for invitation. However, 641 individuals (46.1%) were not assessed for eligibility. Among the 749 assessed individuals, 609 were eligible and 374 participated.Participation among invited eligible individuals was significantly higher with opportunistic than systematic screening (374/609, 61.4% vs. 607/1,312, 46.3%; P < 0.005). However, overall reach was lower in the opportunistic arm because of incomplete assessment for invitation (374/1,479, 25.3% vs. 607/1,437, 42.2%; P < 0.005). Participants in the opportunistic arm had a higher cardiovascular risk burden, including more hypertension, diabetes, and a higher CHA2DS2-VASc-score (3.99 vs. 3.60; P < 0.005). Exclusion rates were higher (18.7% vs. 8.7%; P < 0.005), mainly due to previously diagnosed AF and cognitive impairment.
conclusionOpportunistic screening increased participation among invited individuals and identified a higher-risk population, but its overall population reach was limited by incomplete eligibility assessment. Combining opportunistic and systematic strategies may optimize reach and participation in AF screening programmes.
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.