ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2022
Ristocetin dependent cofactor activity in von Willebrand disease diagnosis: Limitations of relying on a single measure.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2022. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and laboratory diagnosis of von Willebrand disease.Haematologica · 2026Review
- The pivotal role of von Willebrand factor binding to platelet αIIbβ3 in stabilizing the formation of a platelet plug at sites of injury.Haematologica · 2025Article
- Challenges and considerations of genetic testing in von Willebrand disease.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Review
- Association between hemoglobin values and VWF assays: a multicenter investigation.Blood advances · 2024Article
- Laboratory diagnosis of von Willebrand disease in the age of the new guidelines: considerations based on geography and resources.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2023Review
- Ristocetin dependent cofactor activity in von Willebrand disease diagnosis: Limitations of relying on a single measure.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2022Article
- Diagnostic Performance of Von Willebrand Activity Versus Ristocetin Cofactor Tests in the Primary Evaluation of Von Willebrand Disease in Colombia.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/HemostasisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is a common inherited bleeding disorder, however the diagnosis can be complicated by a subjective bleeding history and issues with some current von Willebrand factor (VWF) laboratory assays. Objectives: In the Zimmerman Program, we sought to determine how often a type 1 diagnosis was based on a single low VWF ristocetin cofactor (VWF:RCo) level resulting from the common genetic variant p.D1472H or an isolated assay issue, if that low value was corroborated by the VWF glycoprotein-IbM (VWF:GPIbM) assay, and if retesting confirmed original levels. Methods: New patients being evaluated for bleeding were consented. Analysis included Results: A total of 18% of VWD subjects had a low local VWF:RCo, but normal VWF:Ag and normal central testing including VWF:GPIbM. Seventy percent of the low VWF:RCo cohort had no pathogenic Conclusions: The diagnosis of VWD based on a single low VWF:RCo but normal VWF:Ag, was often attributed to p.D1472H or variability in VWF:RCo that was eliminated with VWF:GPIbM. Our study suggests that using VWF:RCo alone for diagnostic purposes may be insufficient while repeat VWF:RCo or VWF:GPIbM testing can be valuable in establishing a VWD diagnosis.
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.