ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2021
Impact of oral anticoagulant choice for the secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism on the risk of inpatient bleeding.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2021. 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.
- Oral Anticoagulants and Risk of Bleeding and Death in Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism.JACC. Advances · 2026Article
- Association of anticoagulant choice with death in the primary treatment of noncancer venous thromboembolism: Medicare 2011-2018.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- Epidemiology and prevention of venous thromboembolism.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2023Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRandomized trials suggest that direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are at least as effective as warfarin for primary treatment of VTE and that bleeding risk may be lower for some DOACs relative to warfarin. However, there is very little information regarding potential bleeding risks for DOACs versus warfarin in secondary prevention of VTE.
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare rates of bleeding events resulting in inpatient admissions between individuals taking apixaban, rivaroxaban, and warfarin for secondary prevention of VTE during the period 2013-2017.
methodsWe used the IBM MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Database and Medicare Supplemental and Coordination of Benefits Database (IBM Watson Health, Ann Arbor, MI) to establish a retrospective cohort. Initial venous thrombolism events were defined from medical claims, and follow-up for this cohort began 6 months after the initial event. Bleeding events resulting in inpatient admission were identified from claims data over the subsequent year of secondary prevention.
resultsA total of 69 264 individuals were identified for the cohort, with 567 bleeding events. The crude rate of bleeding was highest among warfarin users (1.47/100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.24-1.74) and lower among those on either apixaban (1.00/100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.65-1.54) or rivaroxaban (0.84/100 person-years; 95% CI, 0.66-1.08). In multivariable adjusted Cox models, those on apixaban (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.50-1.29) and rivaroxaban (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.09) had somewhat lower rates of bleeding events relative to those on warfarin.
conclusionsWe found modest evidence of decreased risk of bleeding for apixaban and rivaroxaban. These estimates were relatively imprecise.
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.