ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2024
Primary thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory symptomatic patients with COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reevaluating thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 outpatients: the case for a targeted, risk-based approach.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
- Reply to "Reevaluating thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 outpatients: the case for a targeted, risk-based approach".Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic has prompted the search for strategies to improve outcomes in affected individuals, including those initially managed in outpatient settings. Thromboembolic events have been reported as a concerning complication. Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of primary thromboprophylaxis in outpatients with COVID-19. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022362776). Methods: The study adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed/MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and OVID/Embase and CENTRAL from Cochrane for studies up to December 11, 2023, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials comparing prophylactic-dose anticoagulation with placebo or standard of care in symptomatic outpatients with COVID-19 were included in this analysis. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause hospitalization and death within 30 days. Secondary outcomes included venous thromboembolism, the composite of venous thromboembolism and major arterial cardiovascular events, and the individual components of the primary outcome. Results: Seven randomized controlled trials and 3758 COVID-19 outpatients were included. When compared with placebo or standard of care, thromboprophylaxis was associated with similar rates of all-cause hospitalization or mortality (relative risk, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.77-1.31) and lower rates of venous thromboembolism (relative risk, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08-0.94), corresponding to a 0.6% absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat of 174. Conclusion: Thromboprophylaxis in symptomatic COVID-19 outpatients led to reduction in venous thromboembolism risk, with no impact on hospitalization or death. However, the overall low absolute risk reduction may not support its routine 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.