ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Secondary prevention of venous thromboembolism: Predictors and outcomes of guideline adherence in a long-term prospective cohort study.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. 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.
- Burden of Atherosclerosis and Outcomes of Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Hokusai-VTE Trial.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Trial
- Between Scylla and Charybdis?-Health insurance claims-data to monitor quality of service delivery in ophthalmology.Eye (London, England) · 2024Article
- Implementation of early prophylaxis for deep-vein thrombosis in intracerebral hemorrhage patients: an observational study from the Chinese Stroke Center Alliance.Thrombosis journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) is considered a main goal of VTE management. However, the extent to which physicians adhere to the recommendations from evidence-based guidelines is unknown. Aim: From a large, prospective clinical cohort, we aimed to (1) quantify the adherence of treatment recommendations to evidence-based guidelines and establish its predictors, and (2) estimate its impact on clinical outcomes and costs in patients with VTE. Methods: We included 6'243 consecutive patients with VTE treated at the university outpatient unit. Detailed clinical characteristics and treatment recommendations were recorded. Adherence of treatment recommendations to evidence-based guidelines Results: The adherence to evidence-based guidelines was 36.1%. Among patients with non-adherence, overtreatment was present in 70.1%. Significant patient-related predictors of guideline adherence were (a) age above 50 years, (b) male sex, (c) pulmonary embolism, (d) unprovoked VTE, (e) multiple VTE, (f) laboratory tests not ordered, and (g) various cardiovascular comorbidities. Non-adherence was not significantly associated with mortality, hospitalization, admission to nursing home, and costs. Conclusions: The adherence to evidence-based guidelines was low, and several unrelated predictors appeared. Although these results need to be confirmed in other settings, they highlight the need for implementation of evidence-based guidelines in clinical practice.
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.