ArticleVascular medicine (London, England)2026
Clinical effectiveness of a multidisciplinary thrombosis service versus usual care in the management of venous thromboembolism: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Vascular medicine (London, England), 2026. 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.
- A Survey on Anticoagulation Practices in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease in Saudi Arabia.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common, potentially life-threatening condition. To improve care, a multidisciplinary Adult Outpatient Thrombosis Service (TS) was implemented in one region of Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. This study evaluated the clinical effectiveness of the TS compared to usual care (UC) for patients with newly diagnosed VTE.
methodWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with objectively confirmed VTE between 2017 and 2019. Patients managed by the TS were compared to those receiving UC. Data were obtained from linked administrative and clinical databases. Propensity score matching was applied to control for confounding. Primary outcomes included recurrent VTE and major bleeding. Secondary outcomes were all-cause hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and all-cause mortality. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% CIs were calculated using Poisson regressions; Cox models were used for mortality.
resultsA total of 1499 patients were included (TS:
conclusionManagement of VTE within a multidisciplinary TS was associated with significantly lower rates of complications, hospitalizations, and all-cause mortality compared to UC. These findings suggest that a structured, specialized outpatient thrombosis care model may be associated with favorable clinical outcomes in real-world settings.
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.