Evidence Hub

Lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation according to optimal, borderline, or elevated levels of risk factors: cohort study based on longitudinal data from the Framingham Heart Study

L. Staerk, Bi-Qi Wang, S. Preis, M. Larson, S. Lubitz, P. Ellinor, D. McManus, D. Ko et al.

British medical journal, 2018

5,338 participants · 332 citations

Abstract

Abstract Objective To examine the association between risk factor burdens—categorized as optimal, borderline, or elevated—and the lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation. Design Community based cohort study. Setting Longitudinal data from the Framingham Heart Study. Participants Individuals free of atrial fibrillation at index ages 55, 65, and 75 years were assessed. Smoking, alcohol consumption, body mass index, blood pressure, diabetes, and history of heart failure or myocardial infarction were assessed as being optimal (that is, all risk factors were optimal), borderline (presence of borderline risk factors and absence of any elevated risk factor), or elevated (presence of at least one elevated risk factor) at index age. Main outcome measure Lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation at index age up to 95 years, accounting for the competing risk of death. Results At index age 55 years, the study sample comprised 5338 participants (2531 (47.4%) men). In this group, 247 (4.6%) had an optimal risk profile, 1415 (26.5%) had a borderline risk profile, and 3676 (68.9%) an elevated risk profile. The prevalence of elevated risk factors increased gradually when the index ages rose. For index age of 55 years, the lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation was 37.0% (95% confidence interval 34.3% to 39.6%). The lifetime risk of atrial fibrillation was 23.4% (12.8% to 34.5%) with an optimal risk profile, 33.4% (27.9% to 38.9%) with a borderline risk profile, and 38.4% (35.5% to 41.4%) with an…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 5,338 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free