Why are outcomes different for registry patients enrolled prospectively and retrospectively? Insights from the global anticoagulant registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF)
European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes

Abstract
Retrospective and prospective observational studies are designed to reflect real-world evidence on clinical practice, but can yield conflicting results. The GARFIELD-AF Registry includes both methods of enrolment and allows analysis of differences in patient characteristics and outcomes that may result.
Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and ≥1 risk factor for stroke at diagnosis of AF were recruited either retrospectively (
Interpretations of data from registries that aim to evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of patients with AF must take account of differences in registry design and the impact of recall bias and survivorship bias that is incurred with retrospective enrolment.
Contributors

Keith A A Fox
Author
University of Edinburgh Edinburgh , United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland

Gabriele Accetta
Author

Karen S Pieper
Author

Jean-Pierre Bassand
Author

A John Camm
Author

David A Fitzmaurice
Author

Gloria Kayani
Author

Ajay K Kakkar
Author


