ArticleAdvances in therapy2024
Development and Application of an Attribute-Based Taxonomy on the Benefits of Oral Anticoagulant Switching in Atrial Fibrillation: A Delphi Study.
Article in Advances in therapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPatients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often switch between oral anticoagulants (OACs). It can be hard to know why a patient has switched outside of a clinical setting. Medication attribute comparisons can suggest benefits. Consensus on terms and definitions is required for inferring OAC switch benefits. The objectives of the study were to generate consensus on a taxonomy of the potential benefits of OAC switching in patients with AF and apply the taxonomy to real-world data.
methodsNine expert clinicians (seven clinical pharmacists, two cardiologists) with at least 3 years of clinical and research experience in AF participated in a Delphi process. The experts rated and commented on a proposed taxonomy on the potential benefits of OAC switching. After each Delphi round, ratings were analyzed with the RAND Corporation/University of California, Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness method. Median ratings, disagreement index, and comments were used to modify the taxonomy. The resulting taxonomy from the Delphi process was applied to a cohort of patients with AF who switched OACs in a population-based administrative health dataset from 1996 to 2019 in British Columbia, Canada.
resultsThe taxonomy was finalized in two Delphi rounds, reaching consensus on five switch benefit categories: safety, effectiveness, convenience, economic considerations, and drug interactions. Safety benefit (a switch that could lower the risk of adverse drug events) had three subcategories: major bleeding, intracranial hemorrhage (ICH), and gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Effectiveness benefit had four subcategories: stroke and systemic embolism (SSE), ischemic stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and all-cause mortality. Real-world OAC switches revealed that more OAC switches had convenience (72.6%) and drug interaction (63.0%) benefits compared to effectiveness (SSE 22.0%, ischemic stroke 11.1%, MI 3.1%, all-cause mortality 10.1%), safety (major bleeding 24.3%, GI bleeding 10.6%, ICH 48.5%), and economic benefits (12.1%).
conclusionsThe Delphi-based taxonomy identified five criteria for the beneficial effects of OAC switching, aiding in characterizing real-world OAC switching.
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.