ArticleCirculation reports2022
Correlation Between the Japanese Version of the High Bleeding Risk (J-HBR) Criteria and the PRECISE-DAPT Score, and Optimal J-HBR Cut-Off Score to Predict Major Bleeding.
Article in Circulation reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Association between the modified Japanese Version of High Bleeding Risk scores and clinical outcomes in Japanese patients with lower extremity artery disease undergoing endovascular treatment.Heart and vessels · 2026Article
- Impact of the Japanese Version of High Bleeding Risk Criteria on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.Journal of atherosclerosis and thrombosis · 2024Article
- Comparison of Discriminative Ability of Bleeding Risk Criteria and Scores for Predicting Short- and Mid-Term Major Bleeding Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.Circulation reports · 2024Article
- Diagnostic ability of Japanese version of high bleeding risk criteria for ischemic outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction.Heart and vessels · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
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.