↓ Skip to main content

Laboratory assessment of rivaroxaban: a review

Overview of attention for article published in Thrombosis Journal, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
132 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
167 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Laboratory assessment of rivaroxaban: a review
Published in
Thrombosis Journal, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1477-9560-11-11
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meyer Michel Samama, Geneviève Contant, Theodore E Spiro, Elisabeth Perzborn, Lena Le Flem, Céline Guinet, Yves Gourmelin, Gabriele Rohde, Jean-Luc Martinoli

Abstract

Research into new anticoagulants for preventing and treating thromboembolic disorders has focused on targeting single enzymes in the coagulation cascade, particularly Factor Xa and thrombin, inhibition of which greatly decreases thrombin generation. Based on the results of phase III clinical trials, rivaroxaban, a direct Factor Xa inhibitor, has been approved in many countries for the management of several thromboembolic disorders. Owing to its predictable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics, fixed-dose regimens are used without the need for routine coagulation monitoring. In situations where assessment of rivaroxaban exposure may be helpful, anti-Factor Xa chromogenic assays (in tandem with standard calibration curves generated with the use of rivaroxaban calibrators and controls) could be used. It is important to note that test results will be affected by the timing of blood sampling after rivaroxaban intake. In addition, the anti-Factor Xa method measures the drug concentration and not the intensity of the drug's anticoagulant activity, and a higher than expected rivaroxaban plasma level does not necessarily indicate an increased risk of bleeding complications. Therefore, clinicians need to consider test results in relation to the pharmacokinetics of rivaroxaban and other patient risk factors associated with bleeding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 167 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 163 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 26 16%
Researcher 26 16%
Student > Master 19 11%
Student > Bachelor 17 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 10%
Other 36 22%
Unknown 27 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 75 45%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 16 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 5%
Chemistry 8 5%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 33 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 May 2020.
All research outputs
#6,333,477
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Thrombosis Journal
#94
of 406 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,829
of 206,393 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Thrombosis Journal
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 406 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 206,393 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them