↓ Skip to main content

Laboratory measurement of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: selecting the optimal assay based on drug, assay availability, and clinical indication

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
policy
1 policy source
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
Title
Laboratory measurement of the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants: selecting the optimal assay based on drug, assay availability, and clinical indication
Published in
Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11239-015-1282-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adam Cuker

Abstract

Although the non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) do not require routine monitoring, there are special circumstances in which laboratory measurement may be warranted. The objectives of this review are to summarize evidence on the influence of the NOACs on coagulation tests and provide practical guidance to clinicians on measurement and interpretation of coagulation assays in NOAC-treated patients. Selection of an appropriate assay for NOAC measurement depends on the drug, clinical objective, and assay availability. Separate suggestions for assay selection are provided depending on whether specialized assays are available or whether choice is limited to conventional coagulation assays such as the prothrombin time (PT) and activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT). The dilute thrombin time (TT) and ecarin-based assays are able to quantify dabigatran across a broad range of concentrations, but are not widely available. A normal TT excludes clinically relevant levels. A normal APTT probably excludes excess levels of dabigatran, but does not rule out typical on-therapy drug concentrations. The PT is insufficiently sensitive to dabigatran to be useful in most situations. Factor Xa inhibitors may be quantified with an anti-Xa assay calibrated with drug-specific standards. A normal PT probably excludes excess levels of rivaroxaban and edoxaban, but not typical on-therapy levels of these agents. The PT is less sensitive to apixaban. Depending on the sensitivity of the thromboplastin reagent, a normal PT may not exclude excess levels of apixaban. The APTT has inadequate sensitivity to factor Xa inhibitors and is not recommended for their measurement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Slovenia 1 2%
Unknown 59 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 16%
Other 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 15 25%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 34 56%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Mathematics 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 04 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,501,461
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#67
of 1,091 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,790
of 287,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,091 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 287,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.