Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21995820›Full record

ArticleThrombosis journal2011

Risk of venous thromboembolism and benefits of prophylaxis use in hospitalized medically ill US patients up to 180 days post-hospital discharge.

Li Wang, Nishan Sengupta, Onur Baser

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Thrombosis journal, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Safety and effectiveness of thromboprophylaxis use in hospitalized elderly medical patients at a Saudi tertiary care center.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Emergence of institutional antithrombotic protocols for coronavirus 2019.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. D-dimer Levels in Acute, Medically Ill, Hospitalized Patients: A Large, Prospective, Multicenter Study in the United States.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Li WangSTATinMED Research and The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. obaser@statinmed.com.
Nishan Sengupta
Onur Baser
Janssen (United States) · USSTATinMED (United States) · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assess the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) and bleeding events with or without thromboprophylaxis and the associated costs in a cohort of medically ill patients in both in-hospital and outpatient settings.

methodsA large hospital drug database and linked outpatient files were used to identify patients eligible for this analysis, based on demographic and clinical characteristics.

resultsAmong 11,135 patients identified, 1592 (14.30%) were admitted with chronic heart failure, 1684 (15.12%) with thromboembolic stroke, 3834 (34.43%) with severe lung disease, 1658 (14.89%) with acute infection, and 2367 (21.26%) with cancer. Of the 11,135 patients, 5932 received anticoagulant therapy at some point during their hospitalization and until 30 days after discharge. VTE events occurred in 1.30% of patients who received anticoagulant prophylaxis versus 2.99% of patients who did not. Risk-adjusted total healthcare costs for patients with a VTE or major or minor bleeding event were significantly higher than for those without events (VTE: $52,157 ± 24,389 vs $24,164 ± 11,418; major bleeding: $33,656 ± 18,196 vs $24,765 ± 11,974; minor bleeding: $33,690 ± 14,398 vs $23,610 ± 11,873). In a multivariate analysis, appropriate anticoagulant prophylaxis use was significantly associated with a reduced risk of clinical VTE, compared with no anticoagulant use (hazard ratio: 0.37). Patients admitted with thromboembolic stroke were less likely to have a VTE than patients admitted with cancer (hazard ratio: 0.42).

conclusionsIn this analysis, VTE and major bleeding event rates were lower for patients who received prophylaxis compared with those who did not. Prophylaxis use was associated with lower healthcare costs.

Identifiers

PMID21995820
PMCPMC3215634
OpenAlexW2126794053

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.