MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283321265 · doi:10.1111/jgs.17886

Cognitive impairment, age, quality of life, and treatment strategy for atrial fibrillation in older adults: The <scp>SAGE‐AF</scp> study

2022· article· en· W4283321265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ankur A. Karnik, Jane S. Saczynski, Joseph J. Chung, Jerry H. Gurwitz, Benita A. Bamgbade, Tenes Paul, Darleen Lessard, David D. McManus, Robert Helm

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationInternal medicineOdds ratioStroke (engine)Montreal Cognitive AssessmentCohortQuality of life (healthcare)Prospective cohort studyCohort studyLogistic regressionHeart failurePhysical therapyPediatricsCardiologyDementiaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) treatment includes anticoagulation for high stroke risk individuals and either rate or rhythm control strategies. We aimed to investigate the impact of age, geriatric factors, and medical comorbidities on choice of rhythm versus rate control strategy in older adults. METHODS: VASc score ≥2 and eligible for anticoagulation were recruited for the Systematic Assessment of Geriatric Elements-AF (SAGE-AF) prospective cohort study. An interview that included measures of HRQoL, cognitive function, vision, hearing, and frailty was performed. The association between these elements and AF treatment strategy was examined by multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred forty-four participants (mean age 76 years; 49% female; 85% non-Hispanic white) were enrolled. Rate and rhythm control were used in 534 and 710 participants, respectively. Compared to participants <75 years, those ≥75 were more likely to be treated with a rate control strategy (age 75-84 adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.37 [95% CI 0.99, 1.88]; age 85+ aOR = 2.05, 95% CI 1.30, 3.21). Those treated with a rate control strategy were more likely to have cognitive impairment (aOR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.13, 1.99), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (aOR = 1.82, 95% CI 1.22, 2.72) but less likely to have visual impairment (aOR 0.73 [0.55, 0.98]), congestive heart failure (CHF; aOR 0.68 [0.49, 0.94]) or receive anticoagulation (aOR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36, 0.78). CONCLUSION: Older age, cognitive impairment, and PVD were associated with use of rate control strategy. Visual impairment, CHF, and anticoagulation use were associated with a rhythm control strategy. There was no difference in HRQoL between the rate and rhythm control groups. This study suggests that certain geriatric elements may be associated with AF treatment strategies. Further study is needed to evaluate how these decisions affect outcomes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Geriatrics SocietySame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207