ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2023
Race, ethnicity, and immune tolerance induction in hemophilia A in the United States.
Article 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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Social vulnerability, access to care, and outcomes in hemophilia.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 2026Article
- Genomic ancestry,Haematologica · 2026Article
- Race, Ethnicity, and Hemophilia: A Scoping Review.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2026Review
- The Bleeding Disorders Research Collaborative.Blood vessels, thrombosis & hemostasis · 2025Review
- Modelling US health equity impacts of emicizumab for severe haemophilia A: aggregate distributional cost-effectiveness analysis.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Predicting Inhibitor Development in Hemophilia 'A' using Machine Learning: A Comprehensive Approach to Data Preprocessing, Balancing, and Biomarker Identification Using AI on the CHAMP Dataset.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Article
- Emerging Therapies in Hemophilia: Improving Equitable Access to Care.Journal of blood medicine · 2025Review
- Bad blood: inequity in hemophilia care.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In racially diverse communities, treatment of chronic diseases can vary across racial and ethnic groups. Objectives: To examine healthcare disparities in hemophilia care in the United States by evaluating receipt of immune tolerance induction (ITI) among different racial and ethnic groups. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, people with severe hemophilia A with an inhibitor who entered the Center for Disease Control and Prevention Community Counts registry between 2013 and 2017, were aged ≥5 years at study entry, and had a history of an inhibitor ( Results: Among 614 participants included in the study, 56.4% were non-Hispanic (NH) White, 19.7% were NH Black, 18.4% were Hispanic, and 4.9% were Asian. ITI was received by 85.2% of participants. On bivariable analysis, ITI treatment did not vary by race or ethnicity. On multivariable analysis, NH Black and Hispanic participants were significantly less likely to receive ITI compared to NH White participants (adjusted prevalence ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.84-0.99] and 0.84 [95% CI, 0.75-0.93], respectively). Conclusion: Although the role of ITI may evolve with growing use of emicizumab and the introduction of new hemophilia treatment products, understanding characteristics that influence care, particularly race and ethnicity, where physician bias and patient mistrust can occur, will remain relevant and applicable to other complex therapies, including gene therapy.
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.