ReviewThrombosis research2012
A review of current methods for assessing hemostasis in vivo and introduction to a potential alternative approach.
Review in Thrombosis research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Improving the adhesion, flexibility, and hemostatic efficacy of a sprayable polymer blend surgical sealant by incorporating silica particles.Acta biomaterialia · 2019Article
- Experimental Validation of ARFI Surveillance of Subcutaneous Hemorrhage (ASSH) Using Calibrated Infusions in a Tissue-Mimicking Model and Dogs.Ultrasonic imaging · 2016Article
- Improving Displacement Signal-to-Noise Ratio for Low-Signal Radiation Force Elasticity Imaging Using Bayesian Techniques.Ultrasound in medicine & biology · 2016Article
- Lessons Learned from Animal Models of Inherited Bleeding Disorders.Hematology education. European Hematology Association. Congress. Education Program · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A validated method for assessing hemostasis in vivo is critical for testing the hemostatic efficacy of therapeutic agents in preclinical animal models and in patients with inherited bleeding disorders, such as von Willebrand disease (VWD) and hemophilia A, or with acquired bleeding disorders such as those resulting from medications or disease processes. In this review, we discuss current methods for assessing hemostasis in vivo and the associated challenges. We also present ARFI-Monitored Hemostatic Challenge; a new, potentially alternate method for in vivo hemostasis monitoring that is in development by our group.
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.