ArticleEJHaem2025
Appropriate Management of Thrombotic Risk in Patients With Primary Immune Thrombocytopenia in the UK: A Modified Delphi Consensus.
Article in EJHaem, 2025. 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.
- MPL receptor dimerization and the thrombopoietin pathway in primary immune thrombocytopenia: from molecular mechanisms to targeted therapies.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is characterised by a low platelet count and increased risk of bleeding. Recent research has also proposed that having ITP increases thrombosis risk. Moreover, certain ITP treatments have been associated with an increased risk of thrombosis. This Delphi study aims to assess haematologist opinion regarding aspects of optimise thrombotic risk management in primary ITP in the UK. Methods: The methodology employed a modified Delphi process with two rounds of evaluation from a panel of experts. A literature review on the topic of primary ITP generated input to a steering group of three experts from the UK attended a virtual meeting in May 2024. During this meeting, and guided by an independent facilitator, the group identified five main domains. From these, 42 statements were agreed and developed into an online survey for testing with a wider panel of peers. Results: Overall, 33 statements achieved consensus agreement, and one statement did not achieve consensus. Eight scenario statements were included to identify preferable treatment options among healthcare professionals. Conclusion: Based on the agreement levels achieved, the steering group formulated a set of recommendations to optimise the management of thrombotic risk in patients with primary ITP in the UK. Trial Registration: The authors have confirmed clinical trial registration is not needed for this submission.
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.