ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia2019
Potential of the Community Counts registry to characterize rare bleeding disorders.
Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Building the foundation for a community-generated national research blueprint for inherited bleeding disorders: research priorities for ultra-rare inherited bleeding disorders.Expert review of hematology · 2023Article
- Treatment of patients with rare bleeding disorders in the Netherlands: Real-life data from the RBiN study.Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH · 2022Article
- Bleeding severity in patients with rare bleeding disorders: real-life data from the RBiN study.Blood advances · 2020Article
- An international registry of patients with plasminogen deficiency (HISTORY).Haematologica · 2020Review
- The Swiss Haemophilia Registry-Report From the First 8 Years.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of HemophiliaObservational
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionRare bleeding disorders (RBDs) comprise of heterogeneous coagulation factor deficiencies and platelet disorders that are underreported worldwide.
aimFirst report on RBD data from United States haemophilia treatment center network (USHTCN).
methodsA national surveillance system for the federally recognized USHTCN developed in collaboration with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and American Thrombosis and Haemostasis Network (ATHN) was queried for patients with RBDs. Patient counts were extracted from the HTC Population Profile (HTC PP) component including limited data on patients followed through the USHTCN, and from the Registry component, including patient authorized, detailed clinical data. The prevalence of RBDs in the United States was estimated based on the HTC PP data and compared to the expected national prevalence based on data extrapolated from Orphanet, an international registry.
resultsBased on the estimated prevalence of RBD in the overall 2017 US population, the cases in the HTC network were lower than expected for FI, FII, FX, and FV + FVIII deficiencies by 36%, 61%, 75% and 94%, respectively, and higher than expected for FXIII, FV, FVII, and FXI deficiencies by 7%, 14%, 33% and 185%, respectively. The proportion of RBD patients reported in the HTC PP, enrolled in the Registry, was 10.8%.
conclusionsThere is a clear need to identify individuals with RBDs who could benefit from the comprehensive care provided in the USHTCN. In addition, increased enrolment of people with all RBDs in the Registry is needed to improve knowledge of treatment outcomes of patients with RBDs in the United States.
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.