ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2016
Aspirin dosing frequency in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events.
Review in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The beneficial health effects of puerarin in the treatment of cardiovascular diseases: from mechanisms to therapeutics.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2024Review
- Racial Differences in Over-the-Counter Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug Use Among Individuals at Risk of Adverse Cardiovascular Events.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2024Article
- Low-doses of aspirin promote the growth of human PC-9 lung cancer cells through activation of the MAPK family.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aspirin has been a cornerstone of cardiovascular disease prevention since the late 1980s. Despite the popularity of aspirin and its wide use, the proper dosing and frequency of aspirin has yet to be determined. Early aspirin trials focused on its utility in broad target populations, but this strategy did not magnify the benefit of aspirin, and rather increased the complication rate. We have learned from previous studies that laboratory and clinical response to aspirin therapy in patients with different conditions and settings are diverse. This difference in aspirin response necessitates a personalized, tailored aspirin therapy. We aim to perform a comprehensive review of the current evidence surrounding aspirin responsiveness in several distinct patient populations and the rationale of different aspirin frequency and dosing strategies. Our conclusions call for future studies to determine individualized aspirin strategies to maximize the benefit and minimize the risk of aspirin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.