Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
June 7, 2025Malaysian Family PhysicianOpen Access

A comparative review of current international atrial fibrillation guidelines from a primary care perspective

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

Existing local guidelines were published 10 years ago, prompting the need to review and compare newer international clinical guidelines issued in the past 5 years.

Comparison

ACC vs ESC vs NICE vs APHRS guidelines

Design

Comparative review

Authors

JJJazlan JamaluddinSLSue LiongHBHooi Chin Beh

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Outdated Malaysian AF guideline requires renewal; extends prior recommendations with 5 years of new consensus.

Structured PICO

P
Population
Patients with atrial fibrillation

This review synthesizes and compares major international guidelines for atrial fibrillation to aid primary care physicians in clinical decision-making.

Cite This Study

Jamaluddin et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a8548ad563dbb7b86d984e1https://doi.org/10.51866/cpg.872
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Practice Implications of the Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines2013 · 11 citations
  2. 2Recent Atrial Fibrillation Guidelines – Looking at Both Sides of the Atlantic2013 · 1 citations
  3. 3Management of atrial fibrillation: Figure 12006 · 100 citations
  4. 4Review: Optimizing the Management of Atrial Fibrillation: Focus on Current Guidelines and the Impact of New Agents on Future Recommendations2010 · 3 citations
  5. 5Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation2011 · 42 citations