Question · asked by 1 review

Aspirin vs low molecular weight heparin: Symptomatic DVT

It is very uncertain whether aspirin (ASA) changes symptomatic deep vein thrombosis compared with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (very low certainty).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Aspirin (ASA) vs low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)
Symptomatic deep vein thrombosis · ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents
It is very uncertain whether aspirin (ASA) changes symptomatic deep vein thrombosis compared with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (very low certainty).
Antithrombotic therapy for ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.23 [0.49, 3.08]2 studies · 781 participantsVery low
Aspirin (ASA) vs low molecular weight heparin (LMWH)
Symptomatic deep vein thrombosis · ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents
It is very uncertain whether aspirin (ASA) changes symptomatic deep vein thrombosis compared with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) (very low certainty).
Antithrombotic therapy for ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents (2021) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 1.2 [0.53, 2.72]1 study · 440 participantsVery low

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Antithrombotic therapy for ambulatory patients with multiple myeloma receiving immunomodulatory agents
2021 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
Not reportedlist not extracted yetNot assessed

Studies behind the findings

None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.