ReviewWorld journal of methodology2015
Monitoring anticoagulant therapy with new oral agents.
Review in World journal of methodology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Apixaban Prophylactic Anticoagulation in Patients with Nephrotic Syndrome.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Conservative management of massive rivaroxaban overdose: A case report and literature review.Clinical case reports · 2021Article
- Towards Personalized Antithrombotic Treatments: Focus on P2YClinical pharmacokinetics · 2019Review
- Contemporary utilization of antithrombotic therapy for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation: an audit in an Australian hospital setting.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2018Article
- In vitro and ex vivo Measurement of Prophylactic Dabigatran Concentrations with a New Ecarin-Based Thromboelastometry Test.Transfusion medicine and hemotherapy : offizielles Organ der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur Transfusionsmedizin und Immunhamatologie · 2017Article
- Directly Acting Oral Anticoagulants for the Prevention of Stroke in Atrial Fibrillation in England and Wales: Cost-Effectiveness Model and Value of Information Analysis.MDM policy & practiceArticle
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
Thromboembolic disease is a major leading cause of mortality and morbidity in industrialized countries. Currently, the management of these patients is challenging due to the availability of new drugs with proven efficacy and security compared to traditional oral vitamin K antagonists. These compounds are characterized by a predictable pharmacokinetic profile for which blood monitoring is not routinely needed. Nevertheless, some data have suggested inter-patient variability in the anticoagulant effect of these drugs, raising concerns about their effectiveness and safety. Although mass-spectrometry is the gold standard to determine drug plasma concentrations, this method is not widely available in every-day practice and some coagulation assays are commonly used to determine the anticoagulant effect of these drugs. The present review aims to summarize the current knowledge regarding the clinical question of how and when to monitor patients with new anticoagulant oral agents.
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.