ReviewResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2023
Laboratory-based inequity in thrombosis and hemostasis: review of the evidence.
Review in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Addressing racial disparities in representation across blood, stem cell and organ and tissue donor pools.Vox sanguinis · 2026Review
- 'Raise the Bar', a Canadian intervention to combat disparities in the recognition and management of iron deficiency: Development of the intervention, feasibility and implementation.British journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Review
- Diagnosis and management of iron deficiency in females.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Review
- The detrimental impact of ferritin "normal" ranges on diagnosis of bleeding disorders in women.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Sex, lies, and iron deficiency: a call to change ferritin reference ranges.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of normal in hematology, similar to that in other areas of medicine, is anchored to the perspective of those setting the standard. This means that several laboratory reference intervals and approaches to the conditions of thrombosis and hemostasis are influenced by the vantage point of those in power. Structural inequity, including systemic racism and sexism, can lead to inappropriate normalization of disease states, such as anemia or iron deficiency, or delayed diagnoses, such as in von Willebrand disease. This review will focus on how laboratory reference intervals perpetuate the cycles of inequity in care of patients with disorders of thrombosis and hemostasis. We provide examples and case studies in maternal mortality as well as in disorders such as von Willebrand disease and iron deficiency, question physiology versus pathophysiology, acknowledge the distinction between social constructs and biologic influence, and highlight opportunities for much-needed restructuring in areas such as defining anemia and iron deficiency.
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.