Question · asked by 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis: Major non‐GI bleeding

It is very uncertain whether direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis changes major non‐GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (very low certainty).

What each review found

Include earlier review versions
FindingEffectStudiesGRADE certainty
Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis
Major non‐GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism
It is very uncertain whether direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis changes major non‐GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (very low certainty).
Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer (2018) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
RR 0.84 [0.42, 1.68]4 studies · 1838 participantsVery low

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

The reviews

ReviewSearched up toIncluded studiesAMSTAR 2
Anticoagulation for the long‐term treatment of venous thromboembolism in people with cancer
2018 · 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.