ReviewTherapeutic advances in hematology2015
Current controversies in the diagnosis and management of von Willebrand disease.
Review in Therapeutic advances in hematology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Congenital Bleeding Disorders amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Open questions and recommendations.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2020Review
- Current challenges in the diagnosis and management of patients with inherited von Willebrand's disease in Italy: an Expert Meeting Report on the diagnosis and surgical and secondary long-term prophylaxis.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is the most common inherited bleeding disorder in the world. The spectrum of VWD spans quantitative and qualitative deficiencies of von Willebrand factor (VWF), a platelet adhesive protein. It manifests primarily as mucocutaneous bleeding, but severely affected patients may suffer soft tissue bleeding and hemarthroses. There is disagreement in the multiple guidelines published regarding diagnosis, especially of type 1 VWD, which also remains the most opaque with respect to molecular characterization. Treatment with desmopressin (DDAVP) is most effective in type 1 VWD, but regimens are not standardized. It is not clear which type 2 VWD patients with qualitative deficiencies can be treated with DDAVP and which ones should receive VWF concentrates. No guidelines stipulate which patients might benefit from prophylactic VWF infusions and how they should be dosed. These are some current controversies in VWD that are discussed in this review.
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.