Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29723207›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Benefit, risk and cost of new oral anticoagulants and warfarin in atrial fibrillation; A multicriteria decision analysis.

Jose Mendoza-Sanchez, Federico Silva, Lady Rangel, Linda Jaramillo, Leidy Mendoza, Jenny Garzon, Andrea Quiroga

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jose Mendoza-SanchezGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0001-8990-3895
Federico SilvaGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.
Lady RangelUniversidad Industrial de Santander, Bucaramanga, Santander, Colombia.
Linda JaramilloGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.
Leidy MendozaGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.
Jenny GarzonGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.
Andrea QuirogaGrupo de Ciencias Neurovasculares, Instituto Neurológico, Hospital Internacional, Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia, Floridablanca, Santander, Colombia.
Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia · COIndustrial University of Santander · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWarfarin and new oral anticoagulants are effective in reducing stroke in atrial fibrillation; however, the benefits and risks rates in clinical trials show heterogeneity for each anticoagulant, and is unknown the cost influence on a model considering most of the treatment consequences. We designed a benefit-risk and cost assessment of oral anticoagulants.

designWe followed the roadmap proposed by IMI-PROTECT and the considerations of emerged good practice to perform Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). The roadmap defines the following steps: (1) planning, (2) evidence gathering and data preparation, (3) analyses, (4) explorations, and (5) conclusions. We defined two reference points (0-100) to allocate numerical values for scores and weights, and used an analogue numeric scale to assess physicians' preferences. As benefits of the anticoagulant therapy, we included reductions in stroke and all-cause mortality; intracranial haemorrhage, gastrointestinal haemorrhage, minor bleeding and myocardial infarction were considered risks. We also made an estimation of the annual drug cost per person. MAIN

resultsThe scores were: Apixaban 33, Dabigatrán 25, warfarin 18 and Rivaroxaban 14 this score reveals the most preferred up to the less preferred option, considering the benefit-risk ratio and drug costs altogether. The relative model weights were: 51.1% for risks, 40.4% for benefits and 8.5% for cost. The sensitivity analysis confirms the model robustness.

conclusionsFrom this analysis, apixaban should be considered as the preferred anticoagulant option -due to a better benefit-risk balance and a minor cost influence- followed by dabigatran, warfarin and rivaroxaban.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationCost-Benefit AnalysisDabigatranDecision Support TechniquesDrug CostsHemorrhageHumansModels, StatisticalPyrazolesPyridonesRisk FactorsRivaroxabanStrokeWarfarinAnticoagulantsapixabanDabigatranPyrazolesPyridonesRivaroxabanWarfarin

Identifiers

PMID29723207
PMCPMC5933763
OpenAlexW2801035925

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.