ArticleJournal of neurology2025
Analysis of prognostic differences and risk factors in patients with atrial fibrillation known before ischemic stroke and atrial fibrillation diagnosed after ischemic stroke.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) scientific statement on stroke prevention strategies in patients with device-detected atrial fibrillation: the 4S-DDAF approach.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo compare the 1-year prognoses of patients with atrial fibrillation known before stroke (KAF) with those diagnosed after (AFDAS) and to explore the reasons for any observed differences.
methods420 ischemic stroke patients were assigned to the KAF and AFDAS group. Follow-up information for both groups included the incidence of ischemic stroke recurrence, poor neurofunctional outcomes, and all-cause mortality within one year after the original ischemic stroke episode. The differences in the two groups' prognoses were assessed, and Cox/logistic regression models were employed to identify the underlying factors influencing this prognostic gap.
resultsAFDAS had significantly lower rates of ischemic stroke recurrence (11.06% vs. 19.34%, P = 0.018) and poor neurofunctional outcome (25.48% vs. 36.79%, P = 0.012) compared to KAF. One-year all-cause mortality was similar between the two groups (7.69% vs. 9.91%, P = 0.424). AFDAS had a significantly lower risk of ischemic stroke recurrence even after adjusting for mortality factors (HR, 0.542; 95% CI, 0.325-0.903; P = 0.019). The incidence rate of ischemic stroke recurrence was significantly lower in AFDAS compared to KAF after adjustment for non-cardiac factors (HR, 0.561; 95% CI, 0.316-0.995; P = 0.042). However, there was no discernible difference in the two groups after adjustment for cardiac factors (HR, 0.659/0.588; 95% CI, 0.390-1.115/0.327-1.058; P = 0.120/0.077). The probability of a poor neurofunctional outcome was 3.758-fold higher in patients with recurrent ischemic stroke compared to those without recurrence (HR, 3.758; 95% CI, 1.587-8.900; P = 0.003). Compared to KAF, AFDAS was 88% less likely to have a poor neurofunctional outcome (HR, 0.120; 95% CI, 0.052-0.277; P < 0.001).
conclusionPatients with AFDAS have a better prognosis than those with KAF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40304787What 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.