No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 18, 2026.
A New Risk Scheme to Predict Ischemic Stroke and Other Thromboembolism in Atrial Fibrillation: The ATRIA Study Stroke Risk Score
Daniel E. Singer, Yuchiao Chang, Leila H. Borowsky and 5 more
Journal of the American Heart Association · 2013
Abstract
Background More accurate and reliable stroke risk prediction tools are needed to optimize anticoagulation decision making in patients with atrial fibrillation ( AF ). We developed a new AF stroke prediction model using the original A nticoagulation and R isk F actors in A trial F ibrillation ( ATRIA ) AF cohort and externally validated the score in a separate, contemporary, community‐based inception AF cohort, ATRIA – C ardiovascular R esearch N etwork ( CVRN ) cohort. Methods and Results The derivation ATRIA cohort consisted of 10 927 patients with nonvalvular AF contributing 32 609 person‐years off warfarin and 685 thromboembolic events ( TE s). The external validation ATRIA ‐ CVRN cohort included 25 306 AF patients contributing 26 263 person‐years off warfarin and 496 TE s. Cox models identified 8 variables, age, prior stroke, female sex, diabetes mellitus, heart failure, hypertension, proteinuria, and eGFR <45 mL/min per 1.73 m 2 or end‐stage renal disease, plus an age×prior stroke interaction term for the final model. Point scores were assigned proportional to model coefficients. The c‐index in the ATRIA cohort was 0.73 (95% CI , 0.71 to 0.75), increasing to 0.76 (95% CI , 0.74 to 0.79) when only severe events were considered. In the ATRIA ‐ CVRN , c‐indexes were 0.70 (95% CI , 0.67 to 0.72) and 0.75 (95% CI , 0.72 to 0.78) for all events and severe events, respectively. The C‐index was greater and net reclassification improvement positive comparing the ATRIA score with the CHADS 2 or CHA 2 DS 2 ‐VASc scores. Conclusions The ATRIA stroke risk score performed better than existing risk scores, was validated successfully, and showed improvement in predicting severe events, which is of greatest concern. The ATRIA score should improve the antithrombotic decision for patients with AF and should provide a secure foundation for the addition of biomarkers in future prognostic models.
Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.
Full text
From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 18, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.
Introduction
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common arrhythmia that increases the risk for ischemic stroke by 4‐ to 5‐fold. Oral anticoagulant therapy is highly effective at reducing stroke risk in patients with AF but raises the risk of major bleeding.– Leading clinical practice guidelines– recommend a risk‐based approach to the anticoagulation decision in AF, usually based on the CHADS2 or CHA2DS2‐VASc stroke risk scores. However, these risk scores have only moderate ability to predict which patients will have a stroke.– To improve estimation of stroke risk, we developed and internally validated a new prediction model using the distinctively large experience of the Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) AF cohort. We then externally validated the resulting new risk score in the recently assembled contemporary inception AF cohort, the ATRIA‐Cardiovascular Research Network (ATRIA‐CVRN).
Cohort Assembly
Assembly and validation of the ATRIA nonvalvular AF cohort have been described in detail previously. In brief, we used health plan databases to identify adult members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California who had an outpatient AF diagnosis between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 1997. We included all patients ≥18 years old with either 2 or more outpatient AF diagnoses (ICD‐9 code 427.31) or 1 outpatient AF diagnosis with ECG validation. The date of the first AF diagnosis was considered the patient's index date. Warfarin exposure was based on a validated algorithm using information from pharmacy and laboratory databases. Of the 13 559 patients in the ATRIA cohort, 9217 took warfarin at some point during follow‐up, contributing 33 497 person‐years of observation, and 10 927 contributed some time off warfarin during follow‐up. We used only person‐time off warfarin to develop our stroke risk model. In the Results section we analyze all person‐time off warfarin. The results comparing risk scores were very similar when we restricted the analysis to the 4342 patients who did not take warfarin at any point during follow‐up (data not shown).
Patient Baseline Characteristics
Clinical characteristics for patients in the ATRIA cohort were ascertained by searching inpatient, outpatient, laboratory, and pharmacy databases for the relevant ICD‐9 codes, medications, or lab values within the 5 years prior to the patient's index date (specific codes available by request) as well as administrative databases.– The Kaiser Permanente longitudinal diabetes registry was also used to identify patients with diabetes mellitus. These approaches for identifying comorbid conditions from electronic databases have been previously validated against a review of samples of patient medical records. Crude agreement ranged between 78% and 96% for individual risk factors. Methods for ascertaining proteinuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) are provided in a prior publication.
Outcome Event Identification
ATRIA cohort members were followed from their index date through September 2003. Ascertainment of outcome events has been described previously. Follow‐up was censored at the date of the outcome event, death (ascertained via hospital databases, health plan reporting, Social Security Administration vital status files, and the California state death registry), or health plan disenrollment. Medical records of potential outcome events were reviewed by 2 physician reviewers. Ischemic stroke was defined as sudden onset of a neurologic deficit lasting >24 hours and not attributable to other identifiable causes. Other thromboembolic events were considered valid if they met the following criterion: sudden occlusion of an artery to a visceral organ or extremity documented by imaging, surgery, or pathology and not attributable to concomitant atherosclerosis or other etiology. Events first occurring in‐hospital or resulting from periprocedural complications were excluded. Each event was assigned a modified Rankin score indicating the level of disability at the time of hospital discharge.
ATRIA‐CVRN Cohort
We externally validated the ATRIA score in the separate ATRIA‐CVRN AF cohort. The ATRIA‐CVRN study cohort is made up of 33 247 patients from Kaiser Permanente Northern California and also Kaiser Permanente Southern California aged 21 or older with incident atrial fibrillation (AF) or atrial flutter first diagnosed between January 2006 and June 2009 with confirmation by ECG or physician diagnosis in the electronic medical record. Validating diagnoses of AF included ≥1 inpatient diagnosis or ≥2 outpatient diagnoses. Unlike the ATRIA cohort, the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort did not exclude patients with mitral stenosis or a history of a valve replacement in the mitral or aortic positions; such patients account for 1.5% of the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort.
Determination of baseline features, warfarin use, and outcome event occurrence and adjudication for the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort followed the same approach as for the ATRIA cohort except that for the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort emergency department visits that did not result in hospital admission could still count as valid outcome events. Patients were followed from their index date through June 2009. Follow‐up was censored at the date of the outcome event, death, or health plan disenrollment.
Model derivation and internal validation in the original ATRIA cohort
We used a split‐sample approach to develop and internally validate the new stroke risk score. Patients with any periods off warfarin were randomly divided into a derivation cohort that accounted for approximately two thirds of person‐years contributed and a validation cohort that had the remaining one third of person‐years. We preselected 10 candidate predictor variables previously reported as stroke risk factors in atrial fibrillation: older age, female gender, prior ischemic stroke, diabetes, heart failure, hypertension, coronary artery disease (CAD), peripheral arterial disease (PAD), urine dipstick proteinuria, and low eGFR or end‐stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring dialysis.–,,– In addition, we considered total white blood cell count as an inflammatory marker and an episode of herpes zoster.– Age was categorized as <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, or ≥85 years old, and total white blood cell count was categorized as <8000, 8000 to 9999, or ≥10 000 per microliter. eGFR was dichotomized at ≥45 versus <45 mL/min per 1.73 m2 or ESRD. On the basis of univariate analysis results in the derivation cohort, we also tested an additional interaction term of age by prior stroke. All risk factor values were updated over the follow‐up period using the last value carried forward method. The follow‐up periods that did not have a preceding laboratory measurement going back as far as 5 years were considered normal (ie, WBC<8000/μL, eGFR ≥60 mL/min per 1.73 m2, and no proteinuria). These imputed normal values accounted for 3.5% of the person‐years for WBC, 2.8% of the person‐years for eGFR, and 22.2% of the person‐years for proteinuria.
To minimize false‐positive variable selection, we constructed 1000 bootstrap samples based on the derivation two‐thirds cohort. For each sample, we used a time‐updated Cox proportional hazards model with the backward elimination method to determine predictors significant at the 0.05 level after variable selection. Variables consistently chosen in >60% of bootstrap samples were included in the final model. Traditional measures of model fit and their confidence intervals were calculated for both the derivation cohort and the validation cohort, including the c‐index for discrimination and the goodness‐of‐fit statistic for calibration. To generate a risk score, we assigned points to each variable proportional to its regression coefficients rounded to the nearest integer.
Comparison of ATRIA score with CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc scores
We compared the discrimination capacity of the full‐range ATRIA stroke risk score with the full‐range CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc scores in the entire ATRIA off‐warfarin cohort using the c‐index. In addition, we collapsed the ATRIA stroke risk score into 3 categories on the basis of observed annual thromboembolic (TE) rates: low (TE rate <1.0%), moderate (TE rate 1.0 to <2.0%), and high (TE rate ≥2.0%). These rate cut points were based on a formal decision analysis. We compared the performance of the ATRIA 3‐category scheme to the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc published 3‐category schemes both in terms of the c‐index and net reclassification improvement.–,
Score performance predicting severe events and in primary prevention
We assessed the performance of our model in predicting severe TE events defined as those with a Rankin score ≥3 at hospital discharge (representing moderate to severe disability) or death within 30 days following the event. In addition, we tested the risk score in the primary prevention subset (ie, those individuals with no history of prior stroke).
Validation of ATRIA risk score performance in an external cohort
All model performance assessments were replicated in the separate ATRIA‐CVRN cohort. All analyses were conducted using SAS software, version 9.3 (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC). The study was approved by the institutional review boards of the collaborating institutions. Waiver of informed consent was obtained because of the nature of the study.
Construction of the ATRIA Risk Score
From the original ATRIA cohort of 13 559 AF patients, we accumulated 32 609 person‐years off warfarin contributed by 10 927 patients during the follow‐up period. The median time off warfarin was 2.4 years (range, <1 month to 7.2 years). We validated 685 TE events within this cohort (643 ischemic strokes and 42 other TE events) for an annualized rate of 2.1%. In the two‐thirds derivation cohort, there were 7284 patients with a total of 21 739 person‐years of follow‐up and 456 TE events. In the one‐third validation cohort, there were 3643 patients, 10 870 person‐years of follow‐up, and 229 TE events.
In univariate analysis, all the selected predictor variables were significantly related to stroke risk except for a history of herpes zoster (Table 1). Thromboembolism risk increased monotonically across all 4 age categories, including a near‐doubling of risk for those ≥85 years compared with those 75 to 84 years old. The effect of age was particularly strong among the large group of patients without a prior stroke. However, the effect of older age was muted in patients with a history of prior stroke. Patients with a prior stroke in the 3 younger age categories all had high rates of subsequent stroke, about 6% per year. Patients ≥85 years with a history of stroke had the highest rate of stroke, >8% per year. This interaction of the effects of age and prior stroke was statistically significant (P<0.0001; Figure 1A).
Eight variables were chosen in >60% of the 1000 bootstrap sample models: age (chosen for all 1000 bootstrap samples), prior stroke (for all 1000 samples), female (for 999 samples), diabetes mellitus (for 849 samples), heart failure (for 704 samples), hypertension (for 703 samples), proteinuria (for 870 samples), and eGFR<45 mL/min per 1.73 m2/ESRD (for 624 samples) plus the age by prior stroke interaction term (for 856 samples). Of note, CAD and PAD did not meet the bootstrap sample selection threshold and were not significant predictors when added to the final model (Table 2). In the multivariable model, the hazard ratio for CAD was 1.10 (P=0.27) and for PAD was 0.92 (P=0.70).
The c‐index for the final model was 0.74 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.76) for the derivation two thirds of the cohort, which decreased to 0.72 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.75) when the model was tested in the one‐third validation cohort. The goodness‐of‐fit statistic did not show evidence of poor calibration in either cohort (P=0.14 and P=0.78 for the derivation and the validation sets, respectively). To construct a stroke risk score, we assigned points to predictor variables proportional to the size of their regression coefficients in the model (Table 2). Age and prior stroke were the dominant risk predictors. Possible scores ranged from 7 to 15 for patients with a prior stroke and from 0 to 12 for those with no history of stroke (Table 3).
Comparison of the ATRIA, CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc Risk Scores
Thromboembolic event rates by the 3 scoring systems for the entire ATRIA cohort are shown in Table 4. For the full range of point scores, the c‐index was 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.75) for the ATRIA score, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.71) for the CHADS2 score, and 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.72) for the CHA2DS2‐VASc score (Table 5, column B).
The ATRIA score was collapsed into low (0 to 5 points), moderate (6 points), and high (7 to 15 points) risk categories to fit annualized event rates of <1%, 1% to <2%, and ≥2% per year, respectively. The resulting c‐index was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.67, 0.71). By contrast, using the published low/moderate/high risk categories for the CHADS2 (0 to 1, 2 to 3, and 4 to 6 points, respectively) and the CHA2DS2‐VASc scores (0, 1, and ≥2 points, respectively), the resulting c‐indexes were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.68) and 0.58 (95% CI, 0.57 to 0.59), respectively (Table 5, column B). The low c‐index for the CHA2DS2‐VASc score reflected its very low threshold for its high‐risk category (Figure 2A).
The ATRIA score accurately categorized large fractions of person‐years as low (47%) or high (40%) risk (Figure 2A, Table 4). By contrast, using published thresholds, the CHADS2 score placed most person‐years in low‐risk (50%) and moderate‐risk (45%) categories and the CHA2DS2‐VASc score placed most person‐years (81%) in the high‐risk category. The net reclassification improvement (NRI) from CHADS2 categories to the ATRIA categories was 26% (95% CI, 20% to 32%), composed predominantly of correct up‐classification from moderate risk (Table 6). The NRI from CHA2DS2‐VASc categories to the ATRIA categories was 27% (95% CI, 23% to 31%), resulting exclusively from down‐classification of CHA2DS2‐VASc high‐ and moderate‐risk categories.
External Validation in the ATRIA‐CVRN AF Cohort
In the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort, 496 stroke or other thromboembolic events occurred (93.4% ischemic strokes) during the 26 263 person‐years of follow‐up off warfarin contributed by 25 306 patients, for a TE rate of 1.9% per year. The same pattern of age by prior stroke interaction was seen as in the ATRIA cohort (Figure 1B), although the TE rates in patients with a prior stroke and younger than 85 years were lower in the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort. All ATRIA score risk factors had strong significant univariate effects in ATRIA‐CVRN, although diabetes and eGFR were not significant in the multivariable model (data not shown). In ATRIA‐CVRN the c‐index was 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.72) for the full‐range ATRIA score versus 0.66 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.69) for CHADS2 and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.70) for CHA2DS2‐VASc (Table 5, column E). The distribution of low‐, moderate‐, and high‐risk categories were remarkably similar to that seen in the ATRIA cohort (Figure 2B). The c‐index deteriorated when the point scores were reduced to 3 categories, but the general pattern of performance seen in the ATRIA cohort persisted (Table 5, column E). The c‐index for the 3‐category CHA2DS2‐VASc score was again quite low, at 0.58 (95% CI, 0.58 to 0.59). The pattern of NRI values favoring the ATRIA score that was seen in the original cohort was reproduced in the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort (Table 6).
Risk Score Performance Predicting Severe Outcome Events
Of the 685 TE events in the ATRIA data set, 399 were severe (Rankin score ≥3 at discharge or the patient died within 30 days after the event). When the full point scores were applied to this subset of severe events, the c‐index increased to 0.76 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.79) for the ATRIA score, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.75) for CHADS2, and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.75) for CHA2DS2‐VASc (Table 5, column C). The NRI values for the 3‐category scores with outcomes restricted to severe events were similar to those for all outcome events (Table 6).
We tested the 3 full‐range scores on the subset of 282 severe events in the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort. The c‐index for the ATRIA score was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.78), in excellent agreement with the derivation cohort result. By contrast, in the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort the c‐index deteriorated more for the CHADS2, 0.69 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.72), and CHA2DS2‐VASc, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.68 to 0.74) scores (Table 5, column F). NRIs comparing the 3‐category ATRIA score with those of CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc were very similar to the values seen with the original ATRIA cohort (Table 6).
Prediction in the Primary Prevention Subset of Patients
Focusing only on cohort members without a history of prior stroke (primary prevention), the c‐index for the full‐range ATRIA score was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.69, 0.74) versus 0.66 (95% CI, 0.64, 0.69) for CHADS2 and 0.69 (95% CI, 0.67, 0.71) for the CHA2DS2‐VASc score (Table 5, column D). The same order was preserved in the ATRIA‐CVRN cohort with modest reductions in the c‐index (Table 5, column G). When the primary prevention analysis was restricted to severe outcomes, the c‐index improved (Table 5, column H and I). Agreement across the 2 cohorts was particularly good for the ATRIA score.
Risk Score Comparison Using Risk Category Thresholds Optimized for the ATRIA Cohort Data Set
We also tested point score cutoffs for the CHADS2 (0, 1, 2 to 6 points) and CHA2DS2‐VASc (0 to 2, 3, 4 to 9 points) scores that were optimized to fit the 1% and 2% per year thresholds for rate of thromboembolic (TE) events that we used in categorizing the ATRIA score (Table 4). Using these optimized cut points, the c‐index for the 3‐category CHA2DS2‐VASc score improved markedly to 0.68 (95% CI, 0.66 to 0.69) but was still lower than the c‐index for the ATRIA score. The c‐index for the CHADS2 score was largely unchanged, at 0.65 (95% CI, 0.64 to 0.67).
Using these optimized cut points, the net reclassification improvement (NRI) for the ATRIA 3‐category score was 20% (95% CI, 17 to 24) versus the CHADS2 score and 8.6% (95% CI, 5.3 to 12) versus the CHA2DS2‐VASc score. These lower NRI results indicate less benefit from using the ATRIA score than had been observed with the published cut points. However, the ATRIA score still resulted in net correct reclassification compared with both the CHADS2 and the CHA2DS2‐VASc scores.
Discussion
Anticoagulants are highly effective in preventing ischemic stroke in persons with AF, but they can also cause major hemorrhage. Although prediction of risk of both ischemic stroke and major bleeding is relevant to the anticoagulation decision, formal decision analyses indicate that for most patients with AF, risk of ischemic stroke is the more important one.– Improved prediction of stroke risk in patients with AF would allow better targeted anticoagulant therapy. We used the large observational follow‐up of ATRIA AF cohort members not taking warfarin to optimize use of common clinical features to predict stroke risk. We validated the core risk factors used in the CHADS2 score but added features that we have previously reported to predict stroke (ie, female sex, renal dysfunction, and proteinuria)., Most importantly, we used a broader range of age categories, a decision consistent with multiple prior reports., We found strong amplification of stroke risk across the entire age range, with individuals aged ≥85 years at nearly double the risk of those aged 75 to 84 years. However, individuals who had had a stroke were at elevated risk regardless of age. Age, prior stroke, and their interaction were the dominant risk factors in our model. As with multiple prior studies, we did not observe significant incremental risk prediction from coronary disease, the major component of “VASc” in the CHA2DS2‐VASc score.–, Our resulting ATRIA risk scheme performed better among ATRIA cohort members than did the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc schemes, which are recommended in leading clinical guidelines.– The c‐index was greater, and there was positive net reclassification improvement. From a practical point of view, more patients were accurately classified as low or high risk. Indeed, 46% of patients in both the derivation and validation ATRIA cohorts were categorized by the ATRIA score as having <1% per year risk. Such low risk indicates a small net clinical benefit from anticoagulation., Importantly, all aspects of improved performance with the ATRIA score were reproduced in the separate, larger, and contemporary ATRIA‐CVRN cohort of incident AF patients.
When we restricted outcome to severe events, model discrimination improved, resulting in a c‐index of 0.76 for the ATRIA cohort. Clinically, prevention of severe events is more important than prevention of minor events and accurate prediction of severe events more relevant to the anticoagulation decision. Our findings should prompt other investigators developing stroke risk models for AF to also focus on severe outcomes.
All AF patients who have had an ischemic stroke are at high risk of future stroke, and anticoagulation is strongly indicated. Risk prediction in primary prevention is more uncertain and where most of the challenge of anticoagulation decision‐making lies. Our ATRIA model provides a separate scoring scheme for primary prevention, and this scheme also performed better than the comparator schemes, a finding that was replicated in the separate, external ATRIA‐CVRN cohort. Performance of the ATRIA score was particularly good in predicting severe events in the primary prevention cohort.
Recent reports highlight the promising performance of biomarkers in predicting stroke in patients with AF. Our ATRIA score appears to provide an improved clinical risk factor model on which to add such biomarkers with the goal of optimal risk prediction.
Our model development had notable strengths. We based our findings on a generalizable community‐based cohort with a wide range in age and comorbidities representative of patients treated in usual care settings. The study sample was large, with hundreds of physician‐validated outcome events, allowing powerful assessment of the limited number of candidate predictor variables we tested. Case record review allowed us to assign Rankin severity ratings. We employed a split‐sample derivation/validation approach, and we used multiple bootstrap sample model‐building to reduce overconfidence in the selection of predictors. Most importantly, we validated our model and its relative performance versus the 2 leading alternative risk scores in an independent, contemporary, “external” validation cohort—the ATRIA‐CVRN inception AF cohort. Testing in additional data sets will assess the broader generalizability of our findings. Although the ATRIA score is more complicated than commonly used schemes, particularly CHADS2, the increasing availability of automated real‐time decision support tools based on data routinely available in electronic medical records will likely reduce the need for a simple scoring system.
Conclusion
The ATRIA stroke risk score for AF patients was rigorously developed in a community‐based cohort and externally validated in a separate recently assembled community‐based AF cohort. Our results highlight the importance of including multiple categories of age, prior stroke, and their interaction in determining stroke risk in AF patients. The ATRIA score's performance was superior to the widely used CHADS2 and CHA2DS2‐VASc risk schemes in terms of c‐index and NRI. It identified a substantially larger fraction of patients at low stroke risk. Its performance was particularly good in predicting severe strokes, the category of stroke we are most interested in avoiding. Finally, the ATRIA score lends itself to calculating risk in primary prevention patients, the large group whose stroke risk is most uncertain and for whom personalizing the anticoagulation decision is most pressing. The ATRIA score provides an improved clinically based model on which to add informative biomarkers.
References 29
- 1.
Wolf PA Abbott RD Kannel WB Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham study. Stroke. 1991; 22:983-988
Not in our library10.1161/01.str.22.8.983
- 2.
Hart RG Benavente O McBride R Pearce LA Antithrombotic therapy to prevent stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta‐analysis. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 131:492-501
Not in our library10.7326/0003-4819-131-7-199910050-00003
- 3.
Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation. Analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 1994; 154:1449-1457
Not in our library
- 4.
Fuster V Ryden LE Cannom DS Crijns HJ Curtis AB Ellenbogen KA Halperin JL Le Heuzey JY Kay GN Lowe JE Olsson SB Prystowsky EN Tamargo JL Wann S Smith SC Jr Jacobs AK Adams CD Anderson JL Antman EM Halperin JL Hunt SA Nishimura R Ornato JP Page RL Riegel B Priori SG Blanc JJ Budaj A Camm AJ Dean V Deckers JW Despres C Dickstein K Lekakis J McGregor K Metra M Morais J Osterspey A Tamargo JL Zamorano JL ACC/AHA/ESC 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines (writing committee to revise the 2001 guidelines for the management of patients with atrial fibrillation): developed in collaboration with the European Heart Rhythm Association and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2006; 114:e257-e354
Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.106.177292
- 5.
Wann LS Curtis AB January CT Ellenbogen KA Lowe JE Estes NA III Page RL Ezekowitz MD Slotwiner DJ Jackman WM Stevenson WG Tracy CM Fuster V Ryden LE Cannom DS Le Heuzey JY Crijns HJ Lowe JE Curtis AB Olsson SB Ellenbogen KA Prystowsky EN Halperin JL Tamargo JL Kay GN Wann LS Jacobs AK Anderson JL Albert N Hochman JS Buller CE Kushner FG Creager MA Ohman EM Ettinger SM Stevenson WG Guyton RA Tarkington LG Halperin JL Yancy CW ACCF/AHA/HRS 2011 ACCF/AHA/HRS focused update on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (updating the 2006 guideline): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011; 57:223-242
Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2010.10.001
- 6.
You JJ Singer DE Howard PA Lane DA Eckman MH Fang MC Hylek EM Schulman S Go AS Hughes M Spencer FA Manning WJ Halperin JL Lip GY American College of Chest Physicians Antithrombotic therapy for atrial fibrillation: antithrombotic therapy and prevention of thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence‐based clinical practice guidelines. Chest. 2012; 141:e531S-e575S
Not in our library10.1378/chest.11-2304
- 7.
Camm AJ Lip GY De Caterina R Savelieva I Atar D Hohnloser SH Hindricks G Kirchhof P ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines‐CPG; Document Reviewers 2012 focused update of the ESC guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation: an update of the 2010 ESC guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation—developed with the special contribution of the European Heart Rhythm Association. Europace. 2012; 14:1385-1413
Not in our library10.1093/europace/eus305
- 8.
Gage BF Waterman AD Shannon W Boechler M Rich MW Radford MJ Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the national registry of atrial fibrillation. JAMA. 2001; 285:2864-2870
Not in our library10.1001/jama.285.22.2864
- 9.
Lip GY Nieuwlaat R Pisters R Lane DA Crijns HJ Refining clinical risk stratification for predicting stroke and thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation using a novel risk factor‐based approach: the euro heart survey on atrial fibrillation. Chest. 2010; 137:263-272
Not in our library10.1378/chest.09-1584
- 10.
Van Staa TP Setakis E Di Tanna GL Lane DA Lip GY A comparison of risk stratification schemes for stroke in 79,884 atrial fibrillation patients in general practice. J Thromb Haemost. 2011; 9:39-48
Not in our library10.1111/j.1538-7836.2010.04085.x
- 11.
Fang MC Go AS Chang Y Borowsky L Pomernacki NK Singer DE Comparison of risk stratification schemes to predict thromboembolism in people with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 51:810-815
Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2007.09.065
- 12.
Go AS Hylek EM Borowsky LH Phillips KA Selby JV Singer DE Warfarin use among ambulatory patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: the anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) study. Ann Intern Med. 1999; 131:927-934
Not in our library10.7326/0003-4819-131-12-199912210-00004
- 13.
Go AS Hylek EM Chang Y Phillips KA Henault LE Capra AM Jensvold NG Selby JV Singer DE Anticoagulation therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how well do randomized trials translate into clinical practice? JAMA. 2003; 290:2685-2692
Not in our library10.1001/jama.290.20.2685
- 14.
Go AS Fang MC Udaltsova N Chang Y Pomernacki NK Borowsky L Singer DE Impact of proteinuria and glomerular filtration rate on risk of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation: the anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) study. Circulation. 2009; 119:1363-1369
Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.108.816082
- 15.
van Swieten JC Koudstaal PJ Visser MC Schouten HJ van Gijn J Interobserver agreement for the assessment of handicap in stroke patients. Stroke. 1988; 19:604-607
Not in our library10.1161/01.str.19.5.604
- 16.
Fang MC Singer DE Chang Y Hylek EM Henault LE Jensvold NG Go AS Gender differences in the risk of ischemic stroke and peripheral embolism in atrial fibrillation: the anticoagulation and risk factors in atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) study. Circulation. 2005; 112:1687-1691
Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.105.553438
- 17.
Kang JH Ho JD Chen YH Lin HC Increased risk of stroke after a herpes zoster attack: a population‐based follow‐up study. Stroke. 2009; 40:3443-3448
Not in our library10.1161/strokeaha.109.562017
- 18.
Madjid M Awan I Willerson JT Casscells SW Leukocyte count and coronary heart disease: implications for risk assessment. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004; 44:1945-1956
Not in our library10.1016/j.jacc.2004.07.056
- 19.
Harrell FE Regression Modeling Strategies. 2001 New York, NYSpringer
Not in our library
- 20.
Fisher LD Lin DY Time‐dependent covariates in the cox proportional‐hazards regression model. Annu Rev Public Health. 1999; 20:145-157
Not in our library10.1146/annurev.publhealth.20.1.145
- 21.
Kremers W Concordance for Survival Time Data: Fixed and Time‐Dependent Covariates and Possible Ties in Predictor and Time. 2007 Rochester, MNMayo Clinic
Not in our library
- 22.
May S Hosmer DW A simplified method of calculating an overall goodness‐of‐fit test for the cox proportional hazards model. Lifetime Data Anal. 1998; 4:109-120
Not in our library10.1023/a:1009612305785
- 23.
Eckman MH Singer DE Rosand J Greenberg SM Moving the tipping point: the decision to anticoagulate patients with atrial fibrillation. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011; 4:14-21
Not in our library10.1161/circoutcomes.110.958108
- 24.
Pencina MJ D'Agostino RB Sr Steyerberg EW Extensions of net reclassification improvement calculations to measure usefulness of new biomarkers. Stat Med. 2011; 30:11-21
Not in our library10.1002/sim.4085
- 25.
Casciano JP Singer DE Kwong WJ Fox ES Martin BC Anticoagulation therapy for patients with non‐valvular atrial fibrillation: comparison of decision analytic model recommendations and real‐world warfarin prescription use. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2012; 12:313-323
Not in our library10.1007/bf03261840
- 26.
Shah SV Gage BF Cost‐effectiveness of dabigatran for stroke prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation. Circulation. 2011; 123:2562-2570
Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.110.985655
- 27.
Singer DE Chang Y Fang MC Borowsky LH Pomernacki NK Udaltsova N Go AS The net clinical benefit of warfarin anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151:297-305
Not in our library10.7326/0003-4819-151-5-200909010-00003
- 28.
Hart RG Pearce LA Current status of stroke risk stratification in patients with atrial fibrillation. Stroke. 2009; 40:2607-2610
Not in our library10.1161/strokeaha.109.549428
- 29.
Hijazi Z Oldgren J Andersson U Connolly SJ Ezekowitz MD Hohnloser SH Reilly PA Vinereanu D Siegbahn A Yusuf S Wallentin L Cardiac biomarkers are associated with an increased risk of stroke and death in patients with atrial fibrillation: a randomized evaluation of long‐term anticoagulation therapy (RE‐LY) substudy. Circulation. 2012; 125:1605-1616
Not in our library10.1161/circulationaha.111.038729
Cited by papers we hold 2
- Modelling tool to support decision-making in the NHS Health Check programme: workshops, systematic review and co-production with users · 2021Not checked
- Stability of High‐Quality Warfarin Anticoagulation in a Community‐Based Atrial Fibrillation Cohort: The Anticoagulation and Risk Factors in Atrial Fibrillation (ATRIA) Study · 2016Not checked
Reads
Read by people on this page
None yet.
Checked or read by AI through naulon
None yet.
A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.
Are you an author?
Is this your paper?
Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.