ArticleClinical and translational science2023
Comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin among patients with recurrent venous thromboembolism.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Contemporary Challenges in Venous Thromboembolism: Evolving Populations and Implications for Management and Risk Stratification.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Venous thromboembolism diagnosis definition in claims data: implications for research.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Article
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of direct oral anticoagulants versus warfarin among patients with recurrent venous thromboembolism.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The comparative effectiveness and safety of oral anticoagulant therapies to prevent a second recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) remains undetermined. We aimed to compare the benefits and harms of direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) and warfarin therapies in preventing second recurrent VTE and major bleeding events among patients with a recurrent VTE episode following anticoagulation therapy for incident VTE. A retrospective cohort analysis of two large national insurance claims databases was conducted for patients with two episodes of VTE. Cox proportional hazards models were used after inverse probability treatment weighting to compare risks of second recurrent VTE and major bleeding events. Compared with warfarin, DOAC therapy was associated with significantly decreased risk of second recurrent VTE with no significant difference in risk of major bleeding events. Our findings suggest that, compared with warfarin, DOACs may reduce risk of second VTE recurrence among patients who have experienced one recurrence.
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.