Prediction of incident atrial fibrillation in community-based electronic health records: a systematic review with meta-analysis
Open Access
- 4 October 2021
- Vol. 108 (13), 1020-1029
- https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320036
Abstract
Objective Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common and is associated with an increased risk of stroke. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse multivariable prediction models derived and/or validated in electronic health records (EHRs) and/or administrative claims databases for the prediction of incident AF in the community. Methods Ovid Medline and Ovid Embase were searched for records from inception to 23 March 2021. Measures of discrimination were extracted and pooled by Bayesian meta-analysis, with heterogeneity assessed through a 95% prediction interval (PI). Risk of bias was assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool and certainty in effect estimates by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Results Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, describing nine prediction models, with four eligible for meta-analysis including 9 289 959 patients. The CHADS (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age>75, Diabetes mellitus, prior Stroke or transient ischemic attack) (summary c-statistic 0.674; 95% CI 0.610 to 0.732; 95% PI 0.526–0.815), CHA2DS2-VASc (Congestive heart failure, Hypertension, Age>75 (2 points), Stroke/transient ischemic attack/thromboembolism (2 points), Vascular disease, Age 65–74, Sex category) (summary c-statistic 0.679; 95% CI 0.620 to 0.736; 95% PI 0.531–0.811) and HATCH (Hypertension, Age, stroke or Transient ischemic attack, Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Heart failure) (summary c-statistic 0.669; 95% CI 0.600 to 0.732; 95% PI 0.513–0.803) models resulted in a c-statistic with a statistically significant 95% PI and moderate discriminative performance. No model met eligibility for inclusion in meta-analysis if studies at high risk of bias were excluded and certainty of effect estimates was ‘low’. Models derived by machine learning demonstrated strong discriminative performance, but lacked rigorous external validation. Conclusions Models externally validated for prediction of incident AF in community-based EHR demonstrate moderate predictive ability and high risk of bias. Novel methods may provide stronger discriminative performance. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42021245093.Keywords
Funding Information
- British Heart Foundation (FS/20/12/34789)
This publication has 48 references indexed in Scilit:
- Concordance between administrative claims and registry data for identifying metastasis to the bone: an exploratory analysis in prostate cancerBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2014
- CHADS2 score and risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation: A nationwide cohort study in TaiwanInternational Journal of Cardiology, 2013
- Simple Risk Model Predicts Incidence of Atrial Fibrillation in a Racially and Geographically Diverse Population: the CHARGE‐AF ConsortiumJournal of the American Heart Association, 2013
- THE EFFECT OF ENGLISH-LANGUAGE RESTRICTION ON SYSTEMATIC REVIEW-BASED META-ANALYSES: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF EMPIRICAL STUDIESInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2012
- Progression From Paroxysmal to Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: Clinical Correlates and PrognosisJournal of Invasive Cardiology, 2010
- Development of a risk score for atrial fibrillation (Framingham Heart Study): a community-based cohort studyThe Lancet, 2009
- GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendationsBMJ, 2008
- Meta-analysis: Antithrombotic Therapy to Prevent Stroke in Patients Who Have Nonvalvular Atrial FibrillationAnnals of Internal Medicine, 2007
- Individual patient‐ versus group‐level data meta‐regressions for the investigation of treatment effect modifiers: ecological bias rears its ugly headStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Atrial fibrillation as an independent risk factor for stroke: the Framingham Study.Stroke, 1991