Althunian (2020)

Atrial fibrilation

Cardiology • National_Database Data • UK

Study Metrics
Total Sample 25473
Treatment Group 4008
Control Group 21465
Covariates 32
PICO Comparisons 3
Quality Indicators
Transparency High
DAG Usage No
QBA Performed No

Study Information

First Author: Althunian
Publication Year: 2020
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.5065
Preprint: No preprint

Institution & Funding

Institution Type: Academic
Institutions: Utrecht University, Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board
Funding: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA)

Study Context

Disease: Atrial fibrilation
Disease Category: Cardiology
Data Type: national_database
Number of Data Sources: 1
Geography: UK
Eligible Sample: 25473.0
Number of Treatments: 2

Analytical Methods

Missing Data Method: Multiple imputation
Analysis Method: Cox PH

Quality Methods

Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) Not Used
Quantitative Bias Analysis (QBA) Not Performed

Target Trial Information

Target Trial Name: Rocket AF
Registration Number: NCT00403767
Target Trial DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1009638

TTE vs RCT Comparisons

Detailed comparison between Target Trial Emulation results and corresponding Randomized Controlled Trial outcomes.

major bleeding
Rocket AF
HR Efficacy
Population

patients with atrial fibrillation

Intervention

rivaroxaban

Comparison

warfarin

Outcome

major bleeding

RCT Result

1.04

95% CI: [0.90, 1.20]


vs
TTE Result

1.07

95% CI: [0.95, 1.21]

Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap: Yes
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
Direction Agreement: Same Direction
Both point to similar conclusion
stroke, systemic emoblism, death
Rocket AF
HR Efficacy
Population

patients with atrial fibrillation

Intervention

rivaroxaban

Comparison

warfarin

Outcome

stroke, systemic emoblism, death

RCT Result

0.86

95% CI: [0.74, 0.99]


vs
TTE Result

1.18

95% CI: [1.03, 1.34]

Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap: No
CIs do not overlap
Direction Agreement: Different Direction
Different conclusions
stroke, systemic emoblism prevention
Rocket AF
HR Efficacy
Population

patients with atrial fibrillation

Intervention

rivaroxaban

Comparison

warfarin

Outcome

stroke, systemic emoblism prevention

RCT Result

0.88

95% CI: [0.75, 1.03]


vs
TTE Result

1.04

95% CI: [0.84, 1.30]

Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap: Yes
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
Direction Agreement: Different Direction
Different conclusions

Transparency Indicators

Protocol Registration Available
Data Sharing Not Available
Code Sharing Not Available
Overall Transparency Score:
High Transparency - This study meets good transparency standards.

Conflicts & Funding

Conflicts of Interest: Declared: None
Funding Source: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: Saudi Food and Drug Authority (SFDA)