ArticleTH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis2018
Patient-Reported Treatment Experience with Oral Rivaroxaban: Results from the Noninterventional XALIA Study of Deep-Vein Thrombosis.
Article in TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Patient Satisfaction with Anticoagulation for Venous Thromboembolic Disease: A Systematic Review of Oral and Parenteral Regiments.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Pooled it
- Patient-Reported Outcomes in Venous Thromboembolism: A Systematic Review of the Literature, Current Challenges, and Ways Forward.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- Adherence to rivaroxaban for the treatment of venous thromboembolism-Results from the FIRST registry.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2021Article
- Anticoagulant treatment satisfaction with warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants for venous thromboembolism.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2021Article
- Comparing quality of life and treatment satisfaction between patients on warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants: a cross-sectional study.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For venous thromboembolism (VTE) treatment, patient satisfaction was shown to improve with rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation in the phase III EINSTEIN DVT and EINSTEIN PE trials. This substudy of the prospective, noninterventional XALIA study of rivaroxaban for deep-vein thrombosis treatment assessed if this was also observed in routine clinical practice. Patients enrolled in XALIA who received rivaroxaban or standard anticoagulation treatment were eligible for inclusion in this substudy. Treatment decisions were at the physician's discretion. Patients completed the 17-item Anti-Clot Treatment Scale (ACTS, comprising a 12-item Burdens subscale, a 3-item Benefits subscale and one global item per subscale) during follow-up. The propensity score-matched set (PMS) was used for the main analysis; the adjusted safety analysis (ASAF) set was used for confirmatory purposes. Analyses by follow-up visit and subgroup, including age, sex, and previous VTE, were also conducted. The PMS-ACTS analysis included 458 rivaroxaban-treated and 434 standard anticoagulation-treated patients. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were generally similar across treatment arms. ACTS Burdens scores significantly improved with rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation (least-squares mean difference of 2.4 ± 0.4 points;
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.