evidencegaps
Findings

What do systematic reviews say?

Refine by population, intervention, comparison or outcome
More filters
Evidence found and GRADE certainty

15 questions · 15 findings · 7 reviews

Sort:Best matchNewestHighest certaintyDownload CSV
No studies found 2 · 13.3%GRADE not reported 0 · 0%Very low 2 · 13.3%Low 8 · 53.3%Moderate 2 · 13.3%High 1 · 6.7%

Anticoagulant vs different dose of the same anticoagulant

Adverse events (minor bleeding) · non‐hospitalised individuals with COVID‐19 (asymptomatic and mild disease)

Anticoagulant showed no clear difference in adverse events (minor bleeding) compared with different dose of the same anticoagulant (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prophylaxis vs no prophylaxis

Minor bleeding · ambulatory people with cancer without venous thromboembolism receiving systemic therapy

Direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) prophylaxis showed no clear difference in minor bleeding compared with no prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis

Minor bleeding · patients with active cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis showed no clear difference in minor bleeding compared with vitamin K antagonist secondary prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis probably leads to higher minor bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

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

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor non‐GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis probably leads to higher minor non‐GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (moderate certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor upper GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

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

1 finding from 1 review

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis vs Low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis

Minor lower GI bleeding · patients with cancer with venous thromboembolism

Direct oral anticoagulant secondary prophylaxis showed no clear difference in minor lower GI bleeding compared with low molecular weight heparin secondary prophylaxis (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review

Anticoagulant with or without ASA vs ASA only

Minor bleeding · people with antiphospholipid antibodies and no history of thrombosis

Anticoagulant with or without ASA may leads to higher bleeding ‐ minor (not requiring hospital admission) Median compared with ASA only (low certainty).

1 finding from 1 review