↓ Skip to main content

Comparative risk of incident venous thromboembolism in patients with inflammatory bowel disease initiating tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors or nonbiologic agents: a cohort study

Overview of attention for article published in Canadian Medical Association Journal, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Comparative risk of incident venous thromboembolism in patients with inflammatory bowel disease initiating tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitors or nonbiologic agents: a cohort study
Published in
Canadian Medical Association Journal, November 2017
DOI 10.1503/cmaj.161485
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rishi J Desai, Joshua J Gagne, Joyce Lii, Jun Liu, Sonia Friedman, Seoyoung C Kim

Abstract

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) increases the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) by 2 to 3 times. We compared the reduction in risk of incident VTE associated with use of tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) inhibitors versus nonbiologic immunomodulatory agents in patients with IBD. This observational cohort study used data from public (Medicaid, 2000-2010; Medicare, 2007-2013) and private (Optum Clinformatics, 2004-2013) health insurance programs in the United States. We included a total of 21 671 patients who had IBD without a prior diagnosis of cancer or VTE. The exposure of interest was treatment initiation with TNF-α inhibitor or nonbiologic (azathioprine, mercaptopurine, methotrexate, cyclosporine). The outcome of interest was admission to hospital with VTE as the principal diagnosis. We used Cox proportional hazard regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) separately for each database after risk adjustment for more than 50 covariables using propensity score fine stratification. We used inverse variance meta-analytic methods to pool the adjusted HRs across the 3 databases. We included a total of 5173 patients who started TNF-α inhibitor therapy (1439 in the Medicaid database, 1480 in Medicare and 2254 in Optum Clinformatics) and 16 498 who initiated a nonbiologic agent (5041 in Medicaid, 5166 in Medicare, 6291 in Optum Clinformatics). The adjusted pooled HR for VTE risk with TNF-α inhibitor versus a nonbiologic agent was 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.60 to 1.02). The HR was lower in patients with Crohn disease (pooled HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86) and younger patients (18-44 yr; pooled HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.87). We did not find a statistically significant association between risk of VTE and use of TNF-α inhibitors, relative to nonbiologics, in patients with IBD overall. However, an association was evident for patients younger than 45 years and those with Crohn disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Master 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 39%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 13 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2017.
All research outputs
#7,294,779
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#4,750
of 8,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,808
of 438,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Canadian Medical Association Journal
#69
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,771 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.1. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,555 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.