Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,406

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

American Society of Hematology 2019 guidelines for immune thrombocytopenia

Open access
Neunert, Cindy, Terrell, Deirdra R., Arnold, Donald M., Buchanan, George, Cines, Douglas B., Cooper, Nichola, Cuker, Adam, Despotovic, Jenny M., George, James N., Grace, Rachael F., Kühne, Thomas, Kuter, David J., Lim, Wendy, McCrae, Keith R., Pruitt, Barbara, Shimanek, Hayley, Vesely, Sara K.·2019·Blood Advances

Abstract

Background: Despite an increase in the number of therapies available to treat patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), there are minimal data from randomized trials to assist physicians with the management of patients. Objective: These evidence-based guidelines of the American Society of Hematology (ASH) are intended to support patients, clinicians, and other health care professionals in their decisions about the management of ITP. Methods: In 2015, ASH formed a multidisciplinary guideline panel that included 8 adult clinical experts, 5 pediatric clinical experts, 2 methodologists with expertise in ITP, and 2 patient representatives. The panel was balanced to minimize potential bias from conflicts of interest. The panel reviewed the ASH 2011 guideline recommendations and prioritized questions. The panel used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach, including evidence-to-decision frameworks, to appraise evidence (up to May 2017) and formulate recommendations. Results: The panel agreed on 21 recommendations covering management of ITP in adults and children with newly diagnosed, persistent, and chronic disease refractory to first-line therapy who have non–life-threatening bleeding. Management approaches included: observation, corticosteroids, IV immunoglobulin, anti-D immunoglobulin, rituximab, splenectomy, and thrombopoietin receptor agonists. Conclusions: There was a lack of evidence to support strong recommendations for various management approaches. In general, strategies that avoided medication side effects were favored. A large focus was placed on shared decision-making, especially with regard to second-line therapy. Future research should apply standard corticosteroid-dosing regimens, report patient-reported outcomes, and include cost-analysis evaluations.

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 · 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000966

Cites

7 of 7 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

Metadata

Authors
Neunert, C., Terrell, D. R., Arnold, D. M., Buchanan, G., Cines, D. B., Cooper, N., Cuker, A., Despotovic, J. M., George, J. N., Grace, R. F., Kühne, T., Kuter, D. J., Lim, W., McCrae, K. R., Pruitt, B., Shimanek, H., & Vesely, S. K.
Venue
Blood Advances
Published
2019-12-03
Volume
3
Issue
23
Pages
3829-3866
ISSN
  • 2473-9529 (ISSN-L)
  • 2473-9537
OpenAlex
W2993666578
Cited by
1,406
References
7
FWCI
75.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

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.