The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Evidence Favoring the Use of Anticoagulants in the Hospital Phase of Acute Myocardial Infarction
Abstract
Since the last comprehensive review of anticoagulation in acute myocardial infarction four additional randomized control trials have been reported. The overwhelming majority of all trials favored anticoagulation. Rates of thromboembolism were higher in the control, and hemorrhagic complications in the anticoagulated group. Pooling of all randomized control trials gives mean case fatality rates of 19.6% for the control and 15.4% for the anticoagulated group, a relative reduction of 21% (P less than 0.05 or less than 0.001, depending on the analytic method). Five of six randomized control trials reported "no effect" because the difference favoring anticoagulation was not statistically significant. However, sample sizes in these "negative" papers were too small to protect against missing a 21% reduction in true case fatality rate due to anticoagulation (beta greater than 0.10). All patients who present no specific contraindication should receive anticoagulants during hospitalization for infarction.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689
Cited by
Meta-analysis in clinical trials
DerSimonian, R., & Laird, N. (1986) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 · Cited by 39,552
Schulz (1995) · doi:10.1001/jama.1995.03520290060030 · Cited by 5,634
Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies
Deeks, J., Dinnes, J., D'Amico, R., Sowden, A., Sakarovitch, C., Song, F., Petticrew, M., & Altman, D. (2003) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta7270 · Cited by 2,907
A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials.
Benson, K., & Hartz, A. J. (2000) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm200006223422506 · Cited by 2,347
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (1993) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.48.12.1181 · Cited by 2,033
Metadata
- Authors
- Chalmers, T. C., Matta, R. J., Smith, H., & Kunzler, A.-M.
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 1977-11-17
- Volume
- 297
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 1091-1096
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- OpenAlex
- W2059356295
- Cited by
- 423
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evidence Favoring the Use of Anticoagulants in the Hospital Phase of Acute Myocardial Infarction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm197711172972004
- The paper
- Chalmers, T. C., Matta, R. J., Smith, H., & Kunzler, A.-M. (1977). Evidence Favoring the Use of Anticoagulants in the Hospital Phase of Acute Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm197711172972004
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.