MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Searching for Atrial Fibrillation Poststroke

2019· review· en· W2991001293 on OpenAlexaff
Renate B. Schnabel, Karl Georg Hæusler, Jeff S. Healey, Ben Freedman, Giuseppe Boriani, Johannes Brachmann, Axel Brandes, Alejandro Bustamante, Barbara Casadei, Harry J.G.M. Crijns, Wolfram Doehner, Gunnar Engström, Laurent Fauchier, Leif Friberg, David J. Gladstone, Taya V. Glotzer, Shinya Goto, Graeme J. Hankey, Joseph Harbison, Richard Hobbs, Linda Johnson, Hooman Kamel, Paulus Kirchhof, Eleni Korompoki, Derk Krieger, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Maja‐Lisa Løchen, Georges H. Mairesse, Joan Montaner, Lis Neubeck, George Ntaios, Jonathan P. Piccini, Tatjana Potpara, Terence J. Quinn, James A. Reiffel, Antônio Luiz Pinho Ribeiro, Michiel Rienstra, Mårten Rosenqvist, Sakis Themistoclakis, Moritz F. Sinner, Jesper Hastrup Svendsen, Isabelle C. Van Gelder, Rolf Wachter, Tissa Wijeratne, Bernard Yan

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science CentreHamilton Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersBritish Heart Foundation
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationCardiologyStroke (engine)Internal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cardiac thromboembolism attributed to atrial fibrillation (AF) is responsible for up to one-third of ischemic strokes. Stroke may be the first manifestation of previously undetected AF. Given the efficacy of oral anticoagulants in preventing AF-related ischemic strokes, strategies of searching for AF after a stroke using ECG monitoring followed by oral anticoagulation (OAC) treatment have been proposed to prevent recurrent cardioembolic strokes. This white paper by experts from the AF-SCREEN International Collaboration summarizes existing evidence and knowledge gaps on searching for AF after a stroke by using ECG monitoring. New AF can be detected by routine plus intensive ECG monitoring in approximately one-quarter of patients with ischemic stroke. It may be causal, a bystander, or neurogenically induced by the stroke. AF after a stroke is a risk factor for thromboembolism and a strong marker for atrial myopathy. After acute ischemic stroke, patients should undergo 72 hours of electrocardiographic monitoring to detect AF. The diagnosis requires an ECG of sufficient quality for confirmation by a health professional with ECG rhythm expertise. AF detection rate is a function of monitoring duration and quality of analysis, AF episode definition, interval from stroke to monitoring commencement, and patient characteristics including old age, certain ECG alterations, and stroke type. Markers of atrial myopathy (eg, imaging, atrial ectopy, natriuretic peptides) may increase AF yield from monitoring and could be used to guide patient selection for more intensive/prolonged poststroke ECG monitoring. Atrial myopathy without detected AF is not currently sufficient to initiate OAC. The concept of embolic stroke of unknown source is not proven to identify patients who have had a stroke benefitting from empiric OAC treatment. However, some embolic stroke of unknown source subgroups (eg, advanced age, atrial enlargement) might benefit more from non-vitamin K-dependent OAC therapy than aspirin. Fulfilling embolic stroke of unknown source criteria is an indication neither for empiric non-vitamin K-dependent OAC treatment nor for withholding prolonged ECG monitoring for AF. Clinically diagnosed AF after a stroke or a transient ischemic attack is associated with significantly increased risk of recurrent stroke or systemic embolism, in particular, with additional stroke risk factors, and requires OAC rather than antiplatelet therapy. The minimum subclinical AF duration required on ECG monitoring poststroke/transient ischemic attack to recommend OAC therapy is debated.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.880

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.225
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations245
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207