ArticleResearch and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis2026
Mouse models to study von Willebrand factor in thrombosis: a scoping review.
Article in Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: von Willebrand factor (VWF) plays a significant role in blood coagulation and inflammation and is a key driver of many thrombotic conditions. Identifying appropriate mouse models is critical to developing effective and safe VWF-targeted therapies. Objectives: This scoping review aims to identify and evaluate all mouse models of thrombosis that have demonstrated functional involvement of VWF and/or its primary regulator, ADAMTS-13, followed by a critical review of common models. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies published from database inception to October 2024 that used mouse models of thrombosis. Two reviewers independently screened and extracted data on model methodology and outcomes, as well as secondary measures of thrombosis if they pertain directly to VWF or indirectly through ADAMTS-13. Results: A total of 143 studies published between 2000 and 2024 were included; 32.6% models used C57BL/6 mice, and 32.7% used male mice only. Mice age and weight were reported in 79.7% and 30.8% of studies, respectively. Ferric chloride models were used in 45 (31.5%) studies, and laser injury models in 14 (9.8%). The most common systemic thrombosis model was thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (21 studies, 14.7%), and there were 16 other diseases studied with secondary thrombosis outcomes pertaining to VWF. Conclusion: There is significant methodological heterogeneity across mouse models of thrombosis that have demonstrated involvement of VWF. Lack of standardization negatively impacts cross-study comparability and hinders the strength of preclinical studies of novel therapeutics. Standardization of model methodology is urgently needed, and in the future, researchers should consider the impact of methodology on VWF-related outcomes when designing their 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.