ReviewHematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program2025
Implementation failure: thromboprophylaxis in ambulatory patients with cancer.
Review in Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in patients with cancer, especially those receiving systemic therapy in the ambulatory setting. Despite being a largely preventable condition, it remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in this patient population. Risk prediction models, such as the Khorana score, have been developed to stratify patients according to their underlying risk of VTE and identify those most likely to benefit from thromboprophylaxis by improving its risk-benefit ratio. Recent evidence supports the efficacy and safety of both low molecular weight heparin and direct oral anticoagulants in reducing VTE incidence in ambulatory patients with cancer who are receiving systemic therapy and are at high risk of VTE. Nevertheless, despite guideline recommendations warranting a risk-based approach, studies persistently show low adoption of thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. Barriers to implementation are complex, including clinician-, patient- and system-related factors. However, promising implementation strategies, including electronic health record integrated risk calculators, structured education programs, and patient-centered care pathways, have shown potential in improving adherence to guidelines and better clinical outcomes. This review summarizes the current evidence for thromboprophylaxis in patients with cancer, explores the challenges in translating evidence into practice, and highlights successful models designed to close the gap between guidelines and clinical practice.
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.