ArticlePharmacotherapy2008
Discrepancies in identification of major bleeding events in patients taking warfarin.
Article in Pharmacotherapy, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of anticoagulation strategies in continuous renal replacement therapy: a real-world cohort study.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Precision Medicine at the University of Alabama at Birmingham: Laying the Foundational Processes Through Implementation of Genotype-Guided Antiplatelet Therapy.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2017Review
- The quality of warfarin prescribing and monitoring in Veterans Affairs nursing homes.Journal of the American Geriatrics Society · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
objectiveTo assess the level of agreement between one subjective definition of major bleeding (criteria A) and two objective definitions: the International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis ([ISTH] criteria B) and the Italian Study of Complications of Anticoagulant Therapy ([ISCOAT] criteria C).
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingFour anticoagulation clinics at a university-affiliated medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred twenty patients aged 21-96 years who were taking long-term warfarin therapy and experienced a nonminor bleeding event between July 1, 2001, and June 30, 2006. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsBleeding events were evaluated using three definitions of major bleeding: criteria A-event was fatal or required hospitalization; criteria B-event was fatal, was symptomatic in a critical area or organ, caused a decrease in hemoglobin level of 2 g/dl or more, and/or led to transfusion of 2 or more units of whole blood or red blood cells; and criteria C-event met criteria B definition (but less inclusively identifies critical areas or organs) and/or necessitated surgical or angiographic intervention. One hundred thirty-eight bleeding events in the 120 patients met at least one of the definitions of major bleeding and thus were included in the analysis. Level of agreement among the definitions was determined by the kappa statistic. The level of agreement between criteria B and C was excellent; no discrepancies were found; however, the level of agreement between criteria A and criteria B or C was poor, with a kappa statistic value of -0.134 (95% confidence interval -0.196 to -0.071). Use of criteria A resulted in underreporting of 31 major bleeding events by excluding events that were managed on an outpatient basis.
conclusionThe discrepant event rates determined by using three different definitions of major bleeding underscore the need for implementation of a standardized objective definition. Use of a standardized definition in clinical trials to accurately predict and compare patient outcomes and in clinical practice as a marker for patient safety will increase quality of care and decrease total costs of care in patients treated with warfarin. We suggest implementation of the ISTH criteria in clinical practice as a method to standardize the reporting of major bleeding events.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.