ArticleEmergency medicine international2024
Are We Overusing Coagulation Studies in the Emergency Department?
Article in Emergency medicine international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recognizing Coagulation Disorders in Sepsis in the Emergency Room: A Narrative Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methods: This retrospective observational study, conducted in the ED of King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC) in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, during July and August of 2021(2 months) examined coagulation profile requests. Patients' demographic data (age and gender), medical and clinical history (presenting complaint, comorbidities, and diagnosis), the use of antiplatelets or anticoagulant agents and laboratory values for PT, APTT, and INR were collected. We calculated the total cost of unnecessary coagulation profile testing based on the independent assessment of two ED consultants. Results: Of 1,754 patients included in the study, 811 (46.2%) were males and 943 (53.8%) were females, with a mean age of 42.1 ± 18.5 years. There were 29 (1.7%) patients with liver disease and 21 (1.2%) patients had thromboembolic disease. The majority of the patients' results were within normal levels of PT ( Conclusion: This study showed that coagulation tests are overused in the ED. More than half of coagulation profile tests in our study population were deemed unnecessary and associated with significant cost. Targeted testing based on specific patient presentation and medical history can guide physicians in wisely choosing who needs coagulation studies.
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.