Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 301

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Net clinical benefit of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus no treatment in a ‘real world’ atrial fibrillation population: A modelling analysis based on a nationwide cohort study

Banerjee, Amitava, Lane, Deirdre A., Torp-Pedersen, Christian, Lip, Gregory Y. H.·2012·Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Summary: The concept of net clinical benefit has been used to quantify the balance between risk of ischaemic stroke (IS) and risk of intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) with the use oral anticoagulant therapy (OAC) in the setting of non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF), and has shown that patients at highest risk of stroke and thromboembolism gain the greatest benefit from OAC with warfarin. There are no data for the new OACs, that is, dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban, as yet. We calculated the net clinical benefit balancing IS against ICH using data from the Danish National Patient Registry on patients with non-valvular AF between 1997–2008, for dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban on the basis of recent clinical trial outcome data for these new OACs. In patients with CHADS2=0 but at high bleeding risk, apixaban and dabigatran 110 mg bid had a positive net clinical benefit. At CHA2DS2-VASc=1, apixaban and both doses of dabigatran (110 mg and 150 mg bid) had a positive net clinical benefit. In patients with CHADS2 score≥1 or CHA2DS2-VASc≥2, the three new OACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban) appear superior to warfarin for net clinical benefit, regardless of risk of bleeding. When risk of bleeding and stroke are both high, all three new drugs appear to have a greater net clinical benefit than warfarin. In the absence of head-to-head trials for these new OACs, our analysis may help inform decision making processes when all these new OACs become available to clinicians for stroke prevention in AF. Using ‘real world’ data, our modelling analysis has shown that when the risk of bleeding and stroke are both high, all three new drugs appear to have a greater net clinical benefit compared to warfarin. The editorial process for this article was fully handled by Prof. Christian Weber, Editor-in-Chief.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1160/th11-11-0784

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 301

Metadata

Authors
Banerjee, A., Lane, D. A., Torp-Pedersen, C., & Lip, G. Y. H.
Venue
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Published
2012
Volume
107
Issue
03
Pages
584-589
ISSN
  • 0340-6245 (ISSN-L)
  • 2567-689X
OpenAlex
W2171868042
Cited by
301
References
4
FWCI
31.17
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: Net clinical benefit of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus no treatment in a ‘real world’ atrial fibrillation population: A modelling analysis based on a nationwide cohort study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1160/th11-11-0784
The paper
Banerjee, A., Lane, D. A., Torp-Pedersen, C., & Lip, G. Y. H. (2012). Net clinical benefit of new oral anticoagulants (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban) versus no treatment in a ‘real world’ atrial fibrillation population: A modelling analysis based on a nationwide cohort study. Thrombosis and Haemostasis. https://doi.org/10.1160/th11-11-0784

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.