ReviewKorean circulation journal2017
Real-world Data and Recommended Dosage of Non-vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants for Korean Patients.
Review in Korean circulation journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Combination of Ex Vivo and In Vivo Strategies for Evaluating How Much New Oral Anticoagulants Exacerbate Experimental Intracerebral Bleeding.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023Article
- The Role of Novel Oral Anticoagulants and Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Individualizing Therapy to Optimize Outcomes.Korean circulation journal · 2019Review
- Computed Tomography for Assessment of Left Atrial Appendage Function.Korean circulation journal · 2019Article
- Real World Comparison of Rivaroxaban and Warfarin in Korean Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Propensity Matching Cohort Analysis.Chonnam medical journal · 2019Article
- 2018 Korean Guideline of Atrial Fibrillation Management.Korean circulation journal · 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
Regulatory approvals of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been based on large randomized phase III trials evaluating dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban, or edoxaban relative to warfarin for atrial fibrillation (AF). The results of the trials showed that all NOACs were at least non-inferior to warfarin in the prevention of stroke/thromboembolism and showed lower rates of intracranial bleeding than those associated with warfarin. However, the trials were designed differently, varied in the inclusion/exclusion criteria, and used either one dose or a low/high dose of the NOAC drug. Some of these differences have challenged the ability to directly compare various NOACs, and comparative data on effectiveness and intracranial bleeding are sparse in "real-world" patients. Real-world data complement data from large randomized phase III trials by providing new aspects of the "real-world" absolute risks of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke associated with NOACs vs. warfarin. Moreover, "real-world" fragile patients might have been included (e.g., patients with increased risk of bleeding, liver disease, and chronic kidney disease), although these patients would be less represented in trials. This paper introduces recently published real-world data of NOACs and further suggests the recommended dosage of NOACs for Korean patients.
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.