Loading
Mass Screening / Screening · Journal article
Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care · April 25, 2026
Raises a question worth testing. It does not answer one.
This hypothesis-generating analysis from available RCTs suggests continuous wearable-like AF screening in asymptomatic high-risk individuals substantially increases AF diagnoses and anticoagulant use without demonstrable improvements in adverse clinical outcomes. The authors propose this pattern constitutes overdiagnosis, with estimates ranging from 8–65% depending on methodology, though they explicitly acknowledge the evidence base is too early-stage for definitive conclusions.
Hypothesis-generating pooled analysis of available RCTs. Asymptomatic, high-risk individuals eligible for AF screening in available RCTs. Intervention: Intermittent (≥10 recordings) or continuous (≥1 week) AF screening using wearable-like ECG technologies. Compared with: Control groups (usual care, details not specified).
Continuous screening nearly tripled AF diagnoses (OR 2.84; 95% CI, 1.61–5.02) compared to controls Continuous screening doubled anticoagulant use compared to controls Neither intermittent nor continuous screening significantly reduced adverse outcomes
Neither intermittent nor continuous screening significantly reduced adverse outcomes
Findings suggest caution is warranted before integrating consumer wearable AF screening into primary care pathways, as increased detection and treatment initiation may not translate to patient benefit. General practitioners should be aware that self-screening with wearables may lead to detection of subclinical arrhythmias of uncertain clinical significance, potentially increasing workload without clear evidence of harm reduction.
Hypothesis-generating analysis from available RCTs suggests wearable AF screening may increase diagnosis without improving clinical outcomes, but evidence is exploratory and not systematic.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
Findings suggest caution is warranted before integrating consumer wearable AF screening into primary care pathways, as increased detection and treatment initiation may not translate to patient benefit. General practitioners should be aware that self-screening with wearables may lead to detection of subclinical arrhythmias of uncertain clinical significance, potentially increasing workload without clear evidence of harm reduction.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Purpose. Wearable technologies are increasingly used to screen for atrial fibrillation (AF), often outside formal clinical pathways. While this holds promise for early detection, the impact on patient outcomes remains unclear. We aimed to examine the hypothesis whether intermittent and continuous AF screening using wearable-like technologies leads to overdiagnosis in asymptomatic, high-risk individuals.Methods. This hypothesis-generating analysis draws on available RCTs screening asymptomatic, high-risk individuals for AF using wearable-like ECG technologies. It is not a systematic review, as the field remains too early-stage for formal evidence synthesis. Eligible studies included either intermittent (≥10 recordings) or continuous monitoring for ≥1 week, reflecting typical smartwatch use. Primary outcomes included AF diagnoses, anticoagulant use, and adverse events. Overdiagnosis was inferred when excess AF detection did not translate into improved clinical outcomes. Analyses used Mantel-Haenszel random-effects models.Results. Continuous screening nearly tripled AF diagnoses (OR 2.84; 95% CI, 1.61-5.02) and doubled anticoagulant use compared to controls. Intermittent screening showed a non-significant 1.8-fold increase. Neither method significantly reduced adverse outcomes. A pooled analysis revealed a marginal reduction in negative events (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.99). Overdiagnosis estimates varied by method, ranging from 8-29% based on persistent differences in cumulative incidence after the screening period has ended and 47-65% based on increased diagnoses and treatment during the screening phase that are not followed by improved patient-relevant outcomes.Conclusion. Wearable-enabled screening for AF in high-risk patients increases diagnosis and treatment without clear benefit in clinical outcomes. These findings support the hypothesis of overdiagnosis and findings highlight the need for cautious integration of consumer technologies into primary care. Further trials with extended follow-up in low-risk populations are needed to clarify when AF detection improves outcomes versus when it leads to unnecessary medicalisation and harm.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.