MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390742470 · doi:10.1177/17474930241227783

Variations in the prevalence of atrial fibrillation, and in the strength of its association with ischemic stroke, in countries with different income levels: INTERSTROKE case–control study

2024· article· en· W4390742470 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Murphy, Albertino Damasceno, Catriona Reddin, Graeme J. Hankey, Helle K. Iversen, Shahram Oveisgharan, Fernando Laņas, Anna Członkowska, Peter Langhorne, Adesola Ogunniyi, Mohammad Wasay, Zvonko Rumboldt, Conor Judge, Aytekin Oğuz, Charles Mondo, Yaroslav Winter, Annika Rosengren, Nana Pogosova, Álvaro Avezum, Yongchai Nilanont, Ernesto Peñaherrera, Denis Xavier, Patricio López‐Jaramillo, Xingyu Wang, Salim Yusuf, Martin O’Donnell

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Stroke · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
FundersEuropean Research CouncilWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationIschemic strokeStroke (engine)Internal medicineAssociation (psychology)CardiologyIschemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The contribution of atrial fibrillation (AF) to the etiology and burden of stroke may vary by country income level. AIMS: We examined differences in the prevalence of AF and described variations in the magnitude of the association between AF and ischemic stroke by country income level. METHODS: In the INTERSTROKE case-control study, participants with acute first ischemic stroke were recruited across 32 countries. We included 10,363 ischemic stroke cases and 10,333 community or hospital controls who were matched for age, sex, and center. Participants were grouped into high-income (HIC), upper-middle-income (subdivided into two groups-UMIC-1 and UMIC-2), and lower-middle-income (LMIC) countries, based on gross national income. We evaluated the risk factors for AF overall and by country income level, and evaluated the association of AF with ischemic stroke. RESULTS: AF was documented in 11.9% (n = 1235) of cases and 3.2% (n = 328) of controls. Compared to HIC, the prevalence of AF was significantly lower in UMIC-2 (aOR 0.35, 95% CI 0.29-0.41) and LMIC (aOR 0.50, 95% CI 0.41-0.60) on multivariable analysis. Hypertension, female sex, valvular heart disease, and alcohol intake were stronger risk factors for AF in lower-income countries, and obesity a stronger risk factor in higher-income countries. The magnitude of association between AF and ischemic stroke was significantly higher in lower-income countries compared to higher-income countries. The population attributable fraction for AF and stroke varied by region and was 15.7% (95% CI 13.7-17.8) in HIC, 14.6% (95% CI 12.3-17.1) in UMIC-1, 5.7% (95% CI 4.9-6.7) in UMIC-2, and 6.3% (95% CI 5.3-7.3) in LMIC. CONCLUSION: Risk factors for AF vary by country income level. AF contributes to stroke burden to a greater extent in higher-income countries than in lower-income countries, due to a higher prevalence and despite a lower magnitude of odds ratio.

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)0.002
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of StrokeSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207