ArticlePatient preference and adherence2021
Estimated Thresholds of Minimum Necessary Adherence for Effective Treatment with Direct Oral Anticoagulants - A Retrospective Cohort Study in Health Insurance Claims Data.
Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adherence to oral thromboprophylaxis in atrial fibrillation: an overview for clinicians.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2025Review
- Minimal Adherence Threshold to Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation to Reduce the Risk of Thromboembolism and Death: A Nationwide Cohort Study.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2025Article
- Electronic Monitoring of Medication Adherence to Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2025Review
- Intake Patterns and Experiences of Patients Using Direct Oral Anticoagulants Measured by Electronic Monitoring in Community Pharmacies.Patient preference and adherence · 2024Article
- A prediction model for nonpersistence or nonadherence to direct oral anticoagulants in hospitalized patients with atrial fibrillation.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2022Article
- Can Machine Learning from Real-World Data Support Drug Treatment Decisions? A Prediction Modeling Case for Direct Oral Anticoagulants.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
- Adherence and persistence to oral anticoagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: A Belgian nationwide cohort study.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn essential contribution regarding the prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with (non-valvular) atrial fibrillation (AF) is good adherence to direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). However, it is an open question what "good" adherence means for DOACs or below which threshold non-adherence is clinically relevant for AF patients. Ultimately, such a classification could prevent strokes and associated costs through adjusted treatment regimens or supportive measures.
methodsWe selected 10,092 AF patients from health insurance claims data between 2014 and 2018 who were issued a majority (at least half of the number) of maximum approved strength prescriptions of one of the following DOACs, namely rivaroxaban, apixaban, or dabigatran. Due to the limited sample size, the prescriptions of dabigatran had to be finally excluded for the cut-off analysis. DOAC adherence was calculated as the proportion of days covered (PDC) by dividing the days of theoretical use (days covered) of the drug by the duration in days of the observation interval. PDC cut-off values were derived from stroke risk as a function of continuous PDC values in time-to-event analyses and corresponding dose-response models. The influence of adherence-promoting interventions (targeted and untargeted) on the occurrence of strokes and related costs was then projected, considering intervention costs per patient.
resultsThe population had a mean age of 74.5 years and 50% were female. The median PDC was 0.79 ± 0.28 with a median follow-up time of 1218 days, in which 2% of all DOAC patients had a stroke. The adherence cut-offs for good adherence were identified at 0.78 for rivaroxaban and 0.8 for apixaban. Targeted interventions appeared to be far more cost-effective than untargeted interventions.
conclusionClear adherence cut-offs enable healthcare professionals to identify patients with clinically relevant non-adherence. Interventions based on these cut-offs appear to be a promising means to optimize DOAC treatment.
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.