Cited by 25Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesPatient-Provider Communication in HealthcarePalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues

Shared decision-making in atrial fibrillation: navigating complex issues in partnership with the patient

Open access
Noseworthy, Peter A., Brito, Juan P., Kunneman, Marleen, Hargraves, Ian G., Zeballos-Palacios, Claudia, Montori, Victor M., Ting, Henry H.·2019·Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology

Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important risk factor for stroke. Although anticoagulation is effective in mitigating this risk, many high-risk patients are not anticoagulated in routine practice. Furthermore, as many as 50% of those who are prescribed an anticoagulant stop treatment within a year. This under treatment may be due, in part, to difficulty in navigating difficult decisions about initiating potentially lifelong therapy with significant costs, potential risks, and impact on daily life. To address these challenges, the most recent American guidelines issued a class I recommendation to use shared decision-making (SDM) to individualize patients' antithrombotic care. The call by the major cardiovascular organizations for SDM is in an effort to improve quality of care by promoting decisions that reflect what is best for an individual patient based on their stroke and bleeding risks, as well as their comorbid conditions and socio-personal context. SDM is readily applicable to current cardiovascular practice, but ongoing work will be needed to determine whether brief, evidence-based, and patient-oriented tools are able to support thoughtful, patient-centered decision-making and, ultimately, improve the rates of appropriate treatment initiation and adherence.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10840-018-0465-5

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Conversation aids are designed for use within the clinical encounter to guide patient and clinician through shared decision-making, unlike patient decision aids.

    “Unlike patient decision aids (which are used by the patient in preparation prior to the clinical encounter), conversation aids are designed for use within the clinical encounter to guide the patient and clinician through the shared decision-making process [28, 30].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Noseworthy, P. A., Brito, J. P., Kunneman, M., Hargraves, I. G., Zeballos-Palacios, C., Montori, V. M., & Ting, H. H.
Affiliations
Mayo Clinic (US)
Corresponding author
Noseworthy, Peter A.
Venue
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology
Published
2018-10-17
Volume
56
Issue
2
Pages
159-163
ISSN
  • 1383-875X (ISSN-L)
  • 1572-8595
OpenAlex
W2897445325
Cited by
25
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5
FWCI
1.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL131535)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Keywords
shared decision-making, atrial fibrillation, anticoagulation, stroke prevention, antithrombotic therapy, treatment initiation, medication adherence, bleeding risk, patient-centered care, patient decision aids, guideline recommendations
MeSH terms
Decision Making, Shared, Anticoagulants, Atrial Fibrillation, Humans, Physician-Patient Relations, United States, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Stroke

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review