Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38883215›Full record

ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2024

The Evolution of Hemophilia Therapeutics: An Illustrated Review.

María G Español, Jessica N Mistretta, Michael D Tarantino, Jonathan C Roberts

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Assessing the real-world value of hemophilia care: how suitable are patient-centered outcomes for hospital-level comparisons?International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Bridging the Evidence Gap in von Willebrand Disease: A Call to Action for Equitable, Evidence-Based Care.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Hemophilia treatments and the paradox of choice.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025
    Article
  6. Recent Advances in Gene Therapy for Hemophilia.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Review
  7. Accuracy of Factor VIII Assays for Measuring Damoctocog Alfa Pegol: A Comparative Analysis.Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

María G EspañolThe Bleeding & Clotting Disorders Institute, Peoria, IL.
Jessica N MistrettaThe Bleeding & Clotting Disorders Institute, Peoria, IL.
Michael D TarantinoThe Bleeding & Clotting Disorders Institute, Peoria, IL.
Jonathan C RobertsThe Bleeding & Clotting Disorders Institute, Peoria, IL.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Hemophilia is a rare genetic bleeding disorder historically associated with high morbidity and mortality. Some individuals with hemophilia suffer associated chronic joint disease, chronic pain, and other physical and mental health challenges. In the last 50 years, a better understanding of the pathophysiology of the disease has resulted in extraordinary therapeutic advances leading to enhanced quality of life and increased life expectancy. We present an illustrated review of the evolution of hemophilia treatment from the development of non-factor therapies to gene therapy.

Indexed as

bleeding disordergene therapyHemophiliahemophilia treatmentillustrated reviewtreatment

Identifiers

PMID38883215
PMCPMC11180375

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.