Association of body mass index with outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation: GARFIELD-AF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective While greater body mass index (BMI) is associated with increased risk of developing atrial fibrillation (AF), the impact of BMI on outcomes in newly diagnosed AF is unclear. We examine the influence of BMI on outcomes and whether this is modified by sex and evaluate the effect of non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in patients with high BMI. Methods GARFIELD-AF is a prospective registry of 52 057 newly diagnosed AF patients. The study population comprised 40 482 participants: 703 underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m 2 ), 13 095 normal (BMI=18.5–24.9 kg/m 2 ), 15 043 overweight (BMI=25.0–29.9 kg/m 2 ), 7560 obese (BMI=30.0–34.9 kg/m 2 ) and 4081 extremely obese (BMI ≥35.0 kg/m 2 ). Restricted cubic splines quantified the association of BMI with outcomes. Comparative effectiveness of NOACs and vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) by BMI was performed using propensity score overlap-weighted Cox models. Results The median age of participants was 71.0 years (Q1; Q3 62.0; 78.0), and 55.6% were male. Those with high BMI were younger, more often had vascular disease, hypertension and diabetes. Within 2-year follow-up, a U-shaped relationship between BMI and all-cause mortality was observed, with BMI of ~30 kg/m 2 associated with the lowest risk. The association with new/worsening heart failure was similar. Only low BMI was associated with major bleeding and no association emerged for non-haemorrhagic stroke. BMI was similarly associated with outcomes in men and women. BMI did not impact the lower rate of all-cause mortality of NOACs compared with VKAs. Conclusions In the GARFIELD-AF registry, underweight and extremely obese AF patients have increased risk of mortality and new/worsening heart failure compared with normal or obese patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".