ArticleBJGP open2018
Non-vitamin k antagonist oral anticoagulants in a European primary care physician survey.
Article in BJGP open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Survey of Saudi General Practitioners on the Use of Thromboprophylaxis Guidelines and Risk Assessment Tools in Atrial Fibrillation.Clinics and practice · 2023Article
- Use of thromboprophylaxis guidelines and risk stratification tools in atrial fibrillation: A survey of general practitioners in Australia.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2022Article
- Patient perceptions of anticoagulant treatment with dabigatran or a vitamin K antagonist for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation according to region and age: an exploratory analysis from the RE-SONANCE study.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 5 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFamiliarity and competency in the options for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation (AF) and the role of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) may vary among primary care physicians (PCPs) from different European countries.
aimsTo investigate PCP views on prescribing and managing NOACs across Europe and identify perceived unmet needs. DESIGN &
settingWeb-based survey including PCPs with particular interest in cardiovascular medicine.
methodA questionnaire was drawn up, containing 10 questions on initiation and ongoing management of NOACs; use of AF stroke guidelines on NOACs and anticoagulant switching; and perceived information needs.
resultsThe overall response rate was 42%. The majority of PCPs declared they are responsible for and confident in both initiating and managing NOAC therapy. In some countries, PCPs are not able to initiate NOAC therapy due to administrative barriers (namely, Italy and Slovakia). No single set of guidelines is referred to across all countries and over a fifth of responders indicate they do not follow specific guidelines. The main learning needs reported were more related to initiation than to ongoing management of anticoagulant therapy.
conclusionAccording to this self-assessment survey, the experience of most PCPs in management of different aspects of AF appears good and only some felt the need for further training. However, in the light of the importance of this topic as public health issue, intensified efforts aiming at better equipping PCPs to meet their key roles in an integrated service across Europe are overdue.
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.