ReviewBlood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue2018
Factors affecting the quality, safety and marketing approval of clotting factor concentrates for haemophilia.
Review in Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mortality in congenital hemophilia A - a systematic literature review.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2021Pooled it
- Emicizumab for the treatment of haemophilia A: a narrative review.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2019Pooled it
- Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research priorities in health services; diversity, equity, and inclusion; and implementation science.Expert review of hematology · 2023Article
- Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research priorities to transform the care of people with hemophilia.Expert review of hematology · 2023Article
- Patient-centered pharmacovigilance: priority actions from the inherited bleeding disorders community.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2023Review
- "The times they are a-changin", ... or maybe not?Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2019Article
- Intracranial haemorrhage in children and adults with haemophilia A and B: a literature review of the last 20 years.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selecting therapeutic products for the treatment of haemophilia follows the process of obtaining market approval of products submitted to the scrutiny of a regulatory agency. In well-resourced countries, key decisions on whether a product is sufficiently safe and of high quality are made by highly expert and well-resourced agencies, such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA). In countries lacking such agencies, well-informed decisions can still be made through an appreciation of the key issues affecting the quality, safety and efficacy of haemophilia products. A number of well-established principles may then be applied in order to make a choice. In this review, reflecting principles outlined by the World Federation of Hemophilia, we outline the key features in determining the acceptability of therapeutic products for haemophilia in order to ensure an optimal choice in all the environments providing haemophilia care.
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.