↓ Skip to main content

Management of antithrombotic therapy in adults with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): a survey of ITP specialists and general hematologist–oncologists

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Management of antithrombotic therapy in adults with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP): a survey of ITP specialists and general hematologist–oncologists
Published in
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11239-018-1649-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Allyson M. Pishko, Mudi Misgav, Adam Cuker, Douglas B. Cines, James N. George, Sara K. Vesely, Deirdra R. Terrell

Abstract

While patients with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and low platelet counts are at risk for bleeding, they are not protected against arterial and venous thrombotic events. Frequently, hematologists are asked to consult on a patient with ITP requiring an antiplatelet (AP) agent or anticoagulant (AC). No direct evidence exists to guide hematologists in weighing the risk of thrombosis against the risk of bleeding in patients with ITP. Therefore, we performed a survey to determine the preferred management of AP/AC therapy in ITP patients. The survey described hypothetical patient scenarios and asked respondents to recommend a minimum platelet count for initiation of AP/AC therapy. We surveyed both hematologists with an international reputation in treatment of ITP (n = 48) and also general hematologist-oncologists in Oklahoma (n = 97). Response rates were 38/48 (79%) for the ITP specialists and 46/97 (47%) for general hematologist-oncologists. Overall, recommended platelet thresholds for antithrombotic therapy were similar between ITP specialists and general hematologist-oncologists. Although both groups recommended a minimum platelet count of 50 × 109/L for AP and AC therapy in most scenarios, there was great variability in individual practice patterns among respondents. This study highlights the need for studies of patients with ITP who require AP/AC therapy to provide high-quality evidence for establishing optimal management strategies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 4 18%
Professor 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Student > Postgraduate 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 6 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 55%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 05 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,600,232
of 23,039,416 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#755
of 992 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#256,692
of 330,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#14
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,039,416 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 992 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 330,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.