CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 938Atrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) ResearchStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Confidence intervals for the number needed to treat.

Open access
Altman, Douglas G·1998·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1309PMC PMC1114210
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease has been associated with a high frequency of arrhythmias. Few studies have analysed the role of reduced lung function in predicting atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and risk of first episode of AF in a prospective study. Data from 13,430 males and females without previous myocardial infarction, who participated in the Copenhagen City Heart Study, were analysed. New AF was assessed at re-examination after 5 yrs and by hospital admission for AF during a period of 13 yrs. Multivariate analyses were used with adjustment for cardiopulmonary risk factors. There were 62 new cases of AF at 5-yr follow-up (0.58%) and 290 cases (2.20%) diagnosed at hospitalisations. Risk of new AF at re-examination was 1.8-times higher for FEV1 between 60–80% of predicted compared with FEV1 ≥80% after adjustment for sex, age, smoking, blood pressure, diabetes and body mass index. The risk of AF hospitalisation was 1.3-times higher for FEV1 between 60–80% and 1.8-times higher for FEV1 <60% compared with FEV1 ≥80%, when additional adjustment was made for education, treatment with diuretics and chest pain at activity. The authors conclude that reduced lung function is an independent predictor for incident atrial fibrillation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1309

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 10.1136/ebm.1.6.164 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 801–900 of 938

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Altman, D. G.
Corresponding author
Altman, Douglas G
ORCID
Altman, Douglas G
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1998-11-07
Volume
317
Issue
7168
Pages
1309-1312
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.317.7168.1309
PMC
PMC1114210
OpenAlex
W1982900907
Cited by
938
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 33 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 36 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 39 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 43 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 32
FWCI
19.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
atrial fibrillation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung function, FEV1, cardiac arrhythmias, risk prediction, Copenhagen City Heart Study
MeSH terms
Confidence Intervals, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Sample Size, Risk Assessment

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