ReviewLife (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Atrial Fibrillation Burden: Assessment, Clinical Significance, and Therapeutic Implications.
Review in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is traditionally classified using categorical clinical patterns and binary recurrence endpoints. However, these measures do not fully reflect arrhythmia frequency, duration, temporal distribution, or progression. AF burden, defined as the proportion of monitored time spent in AF, provides a more granular measure of disease activity and therapeutic response. Recent advances in cardiac implantable electronic devices, insertable cardiac monitors, wearable technologies, and digital platforms have significantly improved burden assessment, although considerable heterogeneity remains in monitoring methods, definitions, and clinically relevant thresholds. This review examines contemporary approaches to AF burden measurement and its associations with thromboembolic risk, heart failure, hospitalization, symptoms, quality of life, disease progression, and mortality. We particularly discuss the reduction of AF burden as a potential therapeutic target following antiarrhythmic drug therapy and catheter ablation, and the limitations of conventional recurrence definitions based on episodes lasting more than 30 s. This review also focuses on the implications for rhythm-control selection, post-ablation monitoring, anticoagulation, and clinical-trial design, while proposing priorities for standardized burden-based assessment.
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.