This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

64/100

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 64 out of 100. Digital health tools

Topic: Amyloid, tau and blood-test diagnosis

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, contributing significantly to morbidity, healthcare costs, and resource utilization.[ 1 ] Patients with AF face a higher mortality and morbidity from stroke, heart failure, dementia, and hospitalizations.[ 1 ] Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are the cornerstone of AF management, as they substantially reduce the risk of stroke and mortality.[ 2 ] Nevertheless, some residual risk still remains despite anticoagulation, with most AF-related mortality linked to cardiovascular causes and comorbidities rather than stroke alone.[ 2 ] [ 3 ] AF is not a yes/no homogeneous diagnosis. In the prospective GLORIA-AF registry of AF patients, the presence of clinical complexity was associated with lower odds of being prescribed with OAC (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44–0.57), higher OAC discontinuation, and with a higher risk of adverse events (hazard ratio [HR] 1.63, 95% CI 1.43–1.86).[ 4 ] Indeed, “high clinical complexity” patients defined using latent class analysis constituted 6.6% of AF patients, and was associated with higher hazards of experiencing the primary composite outcome of all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular events (HR 1.47, 95% 1.24–1.75).[ 5 ] Comorbidities and polypharmacy have an important influence on decision-making, by conditioning either lack of prescription of OAC in patients at risk or inappropriate dosing.[ 6 ] [ 7 ] [ 8 ] Recognizing that AF management is more than simply OAC alone, and requires a holistic and integrated care approach, contemporary guidelines globally on AF management have promoted this concept, based on the Atrial fibrillation Better Care (ABC) pathway, emphasizing Anticoagulation, Better symptom management with rate or rhythm control, and Comorbidity/lifestyle management.[ 9 ] [ 10 ] [ 11 ] The ABC pathway is well supported by clinical trial and real-world evidence,[ 11 ] whereby adherence to the ABC pathway is associated with a reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, and bleeding.[ 12 ] [ 13 ] Despite this, adherence to ABC-based management remains low, whereby a meta-analysis of 14 studies revealed that only 21% (95% CI 13–34%) of AF patients were managed in accordance with the ABC pathway.[ 12 ] This perhaps highlights a critical gap in the implementation of comprehensive evidence-based care strategies.

Key findings

Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common arrhythmia worldwide, contributing significantly to morbidity, healthcare costs, and resource utilization.[ 1 ] Patients with AF face a higher mortality and morbidity from stroke, heart failure, dementia, and hospitalizations.[ 1 ] Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are the cornerstone of AF management, as they substantially reduce the risk of stroke and mortality.[ 2 ] Nevertheless, some residual risk still remains despite anticoagulation, with most AF-related mortality linked to cardiovascular causes and comorbidities rather than stroke alone.[ 2 ] [ 3 ] AF is not a yes/no homogeneous diagnosis.
In the prospective GLORIA-AF registry of AF patients, the presence of clinical complexity was associated with lower odds of being prescribed with OAC (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44–0.57), higher OAC discontinuation, and with a higher risk of adverse events (hazard ratio [HR

Why it matters

This describes a European consortium plan to use AI to manage the complexity and comorbidities of patients with atrial fibrillation, a condition linked to higher risk of dementia among other outcomes. It reports no treatment, cure, or prevention of Alzheimer's disease.

New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →

Study details

Study designmeta-analysis
Effect size6.6%; HR 1.47
Evidence strengthHigh

How this study scored 64/100

Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a meta-analysis pooling many studies. Scored zero for sample size and studied in people because the record does not state it. We have no data on senior author's track record, so that was left out: it earned 61 of the 96 points we could judge it on, which is 64 out of 100.

Component	Points	Why
Journal tier	7 / 10	Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (Thrombosis and Haemostasis)
Journal's citation record	2 / 4	Thrombosis and Haemostasis: journal h-index 248 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29)
Study design	12 / 12	A meta-analysis pooling many studies
Strength of evidence	5 / 5	Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation	10 / 10	Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent	4 / 5	2025 — within 3 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size	0 / 4	Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Effect reported	3 / 3	Effect reported with a statistic (interval, p-value, ratio or similar)
Studied in people	0 / 3	Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Randomised / blinded	0 / 2	A review of other studies — randomisation is not credited here
Times cited	3 / 7	Cited 18 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10)
Citations per year	2 / 5	6.0 citations a year over 3 year(s) since 2025
Impact for its field and year	4 / 6	Cited 11.7× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI)
Cited by studies here	0 / 6	No other study in this library cites it
Still being cited	2 / 4	Cited 18 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex)
Senior author's track record	— / 4	Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record	1 / 3	University of Liverpool: institution h-index 995 (OpenAlex)
Multi-centre collaboration	2 / 3	OpenAlex lists 7 institution(s) in 4 countries
Indexed in PubMed	2 / 2	Indexed in PubMed (PMID 39855632)
Free to read	2 / 2	Free to read
Points	61 / 96	Scored on 19 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 61 of the 96 points we could judge it on is 64 out of 100.
Total	64 / 100	—

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Boriani, G., Mei, D. A., Lip, G. Y., & ARISTOTELES consortium. (2025). A European-Multicenter Network for the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence to Manage Complexity and Comorbidities of Atrial Fibrillation Patients: The ARISTOTELES Consortium. Thrombosis and Haemostasis. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2508-5708

Vancouver

Boriani G, Mei DA, Lip GY, ARISTOTELES consortium. A European-Multicenter Network for the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence to Manage Complexity and Comorbidities of Atrial Fibrillation Patients: The ARISTOTELES Consortium. Thrombosis and Haemostasis. 2025. doi:10.1055/a-2508-5708. PMID: 39855632.

BibTeX

@article{boriani2025-39855632,
  author  = {Boriani, Giuseppe and Mei, Davide Antonio and Lip, Gregory Y.H. and {ARISTOTELES consortium}},
  title   = {{A European-Multicenter Network for the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence to Manage Complexity and Comorbidities of Atrial Fibrillation Patients: The ARISTOTELES Consortium}},
  journal = {Thrombosis and Haemostasis},
  year    = {2025},
  doi     = {10.1055/a-2508-5708},
  pmid    = {39855632},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2508-5708}
}

Related studies in Digital health tools

Similar studies

More on Digital health tools

See all studies in Digital health tools →