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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Venous thromboembolism in the elderly: efficacy and safety of non-VKA oral anticoagulants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Thrombosis Journal, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-9560-12-21 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Vincent Geldhof, Christophe Vandenbriele, Peter Verhamme, Thomas Vanassche |
| Abstract |
Increasing age and renal impairment are risk factors for venous thrombosis but also for anticoagulant-induced bleeding. In large-scale phase III trials, non-VKA oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were at least as effective and safe for the treatment of acute venous thromboembolism as warfarin. Here, we review the efficacy and safety of dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban in the subgroups of elderly patients (≥75 years) and patients with impaired renal function (creatinine clearance ≤50 ml/min). In all phase III trials, the efficacy of NOACs in the prevention of recurrent VTE was conserved both in the elderly subgroup and in the subgroup with impaired renal function. In a meta-analysis of the pooled results, NOACs reduced VTE recurrence compared with warfarin in elderly patients. In elderly patients and patients with impaired renal function, the safety of NOACs was in line with the results of the overall study. NOACs may offer an effective, safer and more convenient alternative for VKAs also in the elderly. However, the efficacy/safety profile of NOACs in the aged population needs to be confirmed in real-life. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 50% |
| India | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 71 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 20% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 45 | 61% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 3% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 3% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 22 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 February 2020.
All research outputs
#2,629,675
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Thrombosis Journal
#39
of 316 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,473
of 255,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Thrombosis Journal
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 316 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 255,754 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 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