ArticleJACC. Advances2025
The mC
Article in JACC. Advances, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Artificial Intelligence for Prediction and Detection of Atrial Fibrillation from Sinus-Rhythm Electrocardiograms and Ambulatory Monitoring.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Sex Differences in Individuals at High Risk of Atrial Fibrillation: A Primary Care Community Cohort Study, 2015-2024.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: A narrative review of current evidence and emerging strategies.European journal of clinical investigation · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Assessing individuals' risk of developing incident atrial fibrillation (AF) is important for making preventive and screening strategies. Objectives: The performance of the mC Methods: Participants from the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis were enrolled in the present study, which involved population of different ethnicities (Caucasian, African-American, Chinese-American, and Hispanic) aged between 45 and 84 from 6 communities in the United States. The discriminative and calibration performance of the mC Results: A total of 4,524 subjects (mean age 60.2 ± 9.5 years; 53.0% female) were included; 565 (mean age 67.0 ± 7.9 years; 46.5% female) developed AF during 13.6 ± 2.5 years of follow-up, with an incidence of 0.93%/year. The mC Conclusions: The mC
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.