ArticleBMC geriatrics2025
Inappropriate dosing of direct oral anticoagulants among very older inpatients with atrial fibrillation.
Article in BMC geriatrics, 2025. 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.
- Oral anticoagulant prescribing and DOAC dosing appropriateness in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: a retrospective study from Vietnam.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2026Observational
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
Abstract
Among very older patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), the frequency of inappropriate direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) dosing, associated factors, and temporal trends in practice are unknown.This retrospective study included consecutive inpatients aged 80 years or older with a discharge diagnosis of atrial fibrillation who were prescribed DOACs at discharge from Beijing Hospital between January 2018 and August 2023. Patients were stratified into underdosed, overdosed, or recommended dosing groups. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors associated with inappropriate dosing, and temporal trends were evaluated using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test.Among 676 inpatients aged ≥ 80 years with AF (mean age 84.4 ± 3.5 years; 53.1% female) who were prescribed a DOAC at hospital discharge (22.9% dabigatran, 62.3% rivaroxaban, 14.8% edoxaban), recommended dosing was observed in 338 patients (50.6%), underdosing in 308 (45.6%), and overdosing in 30 (4.4%). The overall rate of inappropriate dosing was 49.4%. Factors independently associated with underdosing included advanced age (OR = 1.98, 95% CI: 1.52-2.60, p < 0.001), lower creatinine clearance (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.97-0.99, p = 0.01), and discharge from non-internal medicine wards (OR = 2.15, 95% CI: 1.33-3.45, p = 0.002). Overdosing was associated with younger age (OR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.19-0.75, p = 0.005). Although the proportion of recommended dosing increased over the study period, and inappropriate dosing showed a declining trend, these changes did not reach statistical significance.Inappropriate DOAC dosing, especially underdosing, remains common in very older AF inpatients. This issue persists despite years passing, emphasizing the need for patient-focused, collaborative AF management and thorough prognostic studies.
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.