Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31273515›Full record

ArticleJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2019

Assessing patient preferences for switching from warfarin to direct oral anticoagulants.

Jack N Wright, Sara R Vazquez, Kibum Kim, Aubrey E Jones, Daniel M Witt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Antithrombin Therapy: Current State and Future Outlook.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jack N WrightDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Sara R VazquezDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA. sara.vazquez@hsc.utah.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9267-8980
Kibum KimDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Aubrey E JonesDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
Daniel M WittDepartment of Pharmacotherapy, University of Utah College of Pharmacy, 30 South 2000 East, Salt Lake City, UT, 84112, USA.
University of Utah · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Warfarin remains the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulant in the United States, but it has disadvantages such as dietary interactions and frequent laboratory monitoring. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have been introduced as safer and equally effective alternatives to warfarin. This study assessed patient preference for warfarin or DOAC based on a willingness to pay more for potential DOAC benefits. Current warfarin patients with atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism enrolled in the University of Utah Health Thrombosis Service were given a one-time electronic survey that assessed preferences between warfarin and DOACs using scenarios comparing effectiveness, safety, and convenience. When DOACs were preferred, patients were asked how much more they would be willing to pay monthly for the perceived advantages associated with DOACs. With 123 completed surveys, 68% of patients preferred to stay on warfarin. No particular factor influenced patient preference (lack of routine laboratory monitoring, lower risks of major bleeding, and fewer dietary interactions). Reduced stroke risk was associated with the highest value (willing to pay an additional $21). Considering all factors, patients preferring DOACs would pay a median $18 extra per month for the additional benefits. Prior exposure to DOACs was associated with preference for DOACs. Many patients currently taking warfarin preferred to stay on warfarin when given the choice, despite DOAC benefits. Willingness to pay extra for DOAC advantages did not exceed $20 in the majority of survey respondents. Previous DOAC exposure influences patient preference and perceived value for DOACs.

Indexed as

Drug SubstitutionAtrial FibrillationDrug CostsFactor Xa InhibitorsHumansPatient PreferenceSurveys and QuestionnairesVenous ThromboembolismWarfarinFactor Xa InhibitorsWarfarinAtrial fibrillationCostDirect oral anticoagulantPreferenceVenous thromboembolismWarfarin

Identifiers

PMID31273515
OpenAlexW2955735854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.