ArticlePloS one2021
Predicting major bleeding among hospitalized patients using oral anticoagulants for atrial fibrillation after discharge.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and Validation of Dynamic Prediction Model for Thromboembolic and Bleeding Risk in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Initiating Direct Oral Anticoagulants.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025Article
- Bleeding risk in East Asian patients with atrial fibrillation: Validation of the DOAC score in a Japanese multicenter registry.Heart rhythm O2 · 2025Article
- Comparing the Real-World and Clinical Trial Bleeding Rates Associated with Oral Anticoagulation Treatment for Atrial Fibrillation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of the DOAC Score: A Novel Bleeding Risk Prediction Tool for Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Direct-Acting Oral Anticoagulants.Circulation · 2023Article
- Edoxaban for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and age-adjusted predictors of clinical outcomes in routine clinical care.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2022Observational
- Can Machine Learning from Real-World Data Support Drug Treatment Decisions? A Prediction Modeling Case for Direct Oral Anticoagulants.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimReal-world predictors of major bleeding (MB) have been well-studied among warfarin users, but not among all direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) users diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF). Thus, our goal was to build a predictive model of MB for new users of all oral anticoagulants (OAC) with AF.
methodsWe identified patients hospitalized for any cause and discharged alive in the community from 2011 to 2017 with a primary or secondary diagnosis of AF in Quebec's RAMQ and Med-Echo administrative databases. Cohort entry occurred at the first OAC claim. Patients were categorized according to OAC type. Outcomes were incident MB, gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), non-GI extracranial bleeding (NGIB) and intracranial bleeding within 1 year of follow-up. Covariates included age, sex, co-morbidities (within 3 years before cohort entry) and medication use (within 2 weeks before cohort entry). We used logistic-LASSO and adaptive logistic-LASSO regressions to identify MB predictors among OAC users. Discrimination and calibration were assessed for each model and a global model was selected. Subgroup analyses were performed for MB subtypes and OAC types.
resultsOur cohort consisted of 14,741 warfarin, 3,722 dabigatran, 6,722 rivaroxaban and 11,196 apixaban users aged 70-86 years old. The important MB predictors were age, prior MB and liver disease with ORs ranging from 1.37-1.64. The final model had a c-statistic of 0.63 (95% CI 0.60-0.65) with adequate calibration. The GIB and NGIB models had similar c-statistics of 0.65 (95% CI 0.63-0.66) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.64-0.70), respectively.
conclusionsMB and MB subtype predictors were similar among DOAC and warfarin users. The predictors selected by our models and their discriminative potential are concordant with published data. Thus, these models can be useful tools for future pharmacoepidemiologic studies involving older oral anticoagulant users with AF.
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.