ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2015
Cost-Effectiveness of Novel Oral Anticoagulants for Stroke Prevention in Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-effectiveness Evaluations Among the Direct Oral Anticoagulants for the Prevention and Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism: Systematic Review.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisPooled it
- Employing Real-World Evidence for the Economic Evaluation of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation in Thailand.Applied health economics and health policy · 2024Article
- Article
- Characteristics of patients with thromboembolic disorders on warfarin therapy in resource limited settings.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Exploring indications for the Use of direct oral anticoagulants and the associated risks of major bleeding.The American journal of managed care · 2017Article
- Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants: Practical Considerations for Emergency Medicine Physicians.Emergency medicine international · 2016Review
- Cost-effectiveness of apixaban vs. other new oral anticoagulants for the prevention of stroke: an analysis on patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation in the Greek healthcare setting.Clinical drug investigation · 2015Article
- Cost-Consequence Analysis of Apixaban Versus Rivaroxaban for Managing Patients with Venous Thromboembolism in Saudi Arabia.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recently, novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been approved for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Although these agents overcome some disadvantages of warfarin, they are associated with increased costs. In this review, we will provide an overview of the cost-effectiveness of NOACs for stroke prevention in AF. Our comments and conclusions are limited to studies directly comparing all available NOACs within the same framework. The available cost-effectiveness analyses suggest that NOACs are cost-effective compared to warfarin, with apixaban likely being most favorable. However, significant limitations in these models are present and should be appreciated when interpreting their results.
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.