SynthesisDrug safety2019
Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Overview of Systematic Reviews.
Synthesis in Drug safety, 2019. 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.
- DOAC plasma concentration upon hospital admission in a cohort of trauma patients. An observational real-life study.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Observational
- Bleeding Outcomes After Dental Extraction in Patients Under Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants vs. Vitamin K Antagonists: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- The Complex Management of Atrial Fibrillation and Cancer in the COVID-19 Era: Drug Interactions, Thromboembolic Risk, and Proarrhythmia.Current heart failure reports · 2020Review
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
Direct oral anticoagulants are now recommended by major guidelines as first-choice agents for both stroke prevention in non-valvular atrial fibrillation and treatment/prevention of venous thromboembolism in non-cancer patients. Although there are no published head-to-head trials comparing different direct oral anticoagulants, a growing body of evidence from indirect comparisons and observational studies is suggesting that each direct oral anticoagulant may have a specific risk profile. This review aims to (1) synthesize and critically assess the latest evidence in comparative effectiveness and safety research in the aforementioned consolidated therapeutic uses, by performing an overview of systematic reviews and (2) highlight current challenges, namely underexplored areas, where research should be directed, also considering ongoing unpublished studies. The evidence gathered so far on the risk-benefit profile of direct oral anticoagulants is appraised in the light of existing guidelines to discuss whether further implementation should be proposed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31552603What 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.