ReviewResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2025
Normalization in hemophilia: conceptual foundations and clinical implications.
Review in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 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.
- Prospective collection of bleeding rate and factor usage in participants with hemophilia A and B in a noninvestigational product study.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Trial
- Normalization of Haemostasis in People with Haemophilia A: Expert Consensus on Unmet Needs and a Framework for Advancing Towards Health Equity.TH open : companion journal to thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hemophilia is an inherited bleeding disorder characterized by a deficiency in clotting factor, leading to impaired thrombin generation, bleeding complications, and long-term morbidity that severely impacts patients' quality of life. Recent advancements in treatment have significantly empowered the hemophilia community, improving disease control, reducing treatment burden, expanding access to care, and lowering the risks of lifelong complications. These advancements have continually elevated the goals of hemophilia care. The latest innovations have introduced a new ambition: the "normalization" of life for persons with hemophilia. This aspiration is both desirable and promising, with the potential to greatly enhance patients' quality of life and achieve equitable health outcomes. However, it is crucial for the entire community to first determine and define what constitutes an optimal and realistically achievable level of hemostasis normalization using current and emerging therapies. The significant psychosocial impact of hemophilia underscores the importance of targeting not only hemostasis normalization but also life normalization. This approach prioritizes reducing treatment burden and restoring mental well-being. Novel standardized tools are urgently needed to appropriately complement novel therapies, as traditional bleeding rate-based outcome metrics are becoming inadequate for assessing treatment superiority objectively. The potential risks of striving for normalized hemostasis must also be carefully considered. Moreover, specific needs and challenges associated with normalization must be addressed, particularly for carriers and women and girls with hemophilia.
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.