There is preliminary evidence to suggest that some published warfarin dosing algorithms produce biased maintenance dose predictions in patients who require higher than average doses. We conducted a meta-analysis of warfarin dosing algorithms to determine if there exists a systematic under- or over-prediction of dose requirements for patients requiring ≥7 mg/day across published algorithms. Medline and Embase databases were searched up to September 2015. We quantified the proportion of over- and under-predicted doses in patients whose observed maintenance dose was ≥7 mg/day. The meta-analysis included 47 evaluations of 22 different warfarin dosing algorithms from 16 studies. The meta-analysis included data from 1492 patients who required warfarin doses of ≥7 mg/day. All 22 algorithms were found to under-predict warfarin dosing requirements in patients who required ≥7 mg/day by an average of 2.3 mg/day with a pooled estimate of under-predicted doses of 92.3% (95% CI 90.3 - 94.1, I(2) = 24%). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
5
17%
Medicine and Dentistry
5
17%
Nursing and Health Professions
2
7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences
2
7%
Engineering
2
7%
Other
2
7%
Unknown
11
38%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 11 September 2017.
All research outputs
#5,556,288
of 26,801,235 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#1,120
of 4,646 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,360
of 313,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
#13
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,801,235 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,646 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 313,293 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
