ReviewBiomedicines2024
Bleeding Complications of Anticoagulation Therapy in Clinical Practice-Epidemiology and Management: Review of the Literature.
Review in Biomedicines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pharmacovigilance Signal Detection of Drug-Induced Hospitalizations and Mortality: A 5-Year Nationwide Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Rivaroxaban Versus Warfarin in Cerebral Venous Thrombosis: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis.Neurology international · 2025Review
- Article
- Review
- Impact of Antithrombotic Therapy on Thrombotic and Bleeding Complications after Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 2025Article
- Functional outcome after surgical treatment for spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhages: Development of the HeMAtOma score.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Drug-Induced Myocardial Infarction: A Review of Pharmacological Triggers and Pathophysiological Mechanisms.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to their very wide range of indications, anticoagulants are one of the most commonly used drug groups. Although these drugs are characterized by different mechanisms of action, the most common complication of their use is still bleeding episodes, the frequency of which depends largely on the clinical condition of the patient using such therapy. For this reason, to this day, the best method of preventing bleeding complications remains the assessment of bleeding risk using scales such as HAS-BLED. There are many reports in the literature assessing the occurrence of this type of complication after the use of drugs affecting the coagulation process, as well as many reports comparing individual groups of drugs with different mechanisms of action. However, there are still no clear guidelines that would indicate which group of anticoagulants should be preferred in particular groups of patients. The aim of our article is to summarize the data collected so far regarding the safety of using specific groups of anticoagulants and the frequency of bleeding complications after their use.
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.