Family Physician Prescribing Practices and Perspectives on Shared Decision-Making Regarding the Use of Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Patients 75 Years or Older With Atrial Fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Atrial Fibrillation (AF) is common in older adults, yet guideline-recommended oral anti-coagulants (OACs) for stroke prevention are underused in this population. With a growing population of older adults at risk of AF seeking primary care, the objective of the study was to determine the management practices and perspectives of family physicians on the initiation of OACs for stroke prevention in AF patients 75 years or older, including their engagement of patients in shared decision-making. METHODS: This was an online survey of family physicians affiliated with a Primary Care Network in Alberta, Canada. RESULTS: Patient's risk (of falls, bleeding, or stroke) was the most common factor (17/20, 85%) physicians considered when deciding to initiate OAC in older adult patients with AF. Physicians used the CHADS2VASC (13/14, 93%) and HASBLED (11/15, 73%) tools to determine stroke and bleeding risks, respectively. Majority (11/15, 73%) of the physicians agreed that they feel confident initiating OAC for AF patients ≥75, while 20% (3/15) were neutral. All physicians agreed that their patients participated in shared decision-making to initiate OAC for stroke prevention. CONCLUSION: Family physicians strongly consider patient risks and utilize risk-assessment tools when initiating OAC in older adults with AF. Despite all physicians reporting the use of shared decision-making and that their patients were educated on the indications for OAC, confidence in initiating treatment was variable. Further exploration into factors impacting physician confidence is needed.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".