↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Comparative risk impact of edoxaban in the management of stroke and venous thromboembolism

Overview of attention for article published in Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Comparative risk impact of edoxaban in the management of stroke and venous thromboembolism
Published in
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, April 2016
DOI 10.2147/tcrm.s84608
Pubmed ID
Authors

Katie B Tellor, Joseph S Van Tuyl, Anastasia L Armbruster

Abstract

Edoxaban, a factor Xa inhibitor, was approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration in 2015 for stroke prevention in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation and treatment of venous thromboembolism. It is the fourth target-specific oral anticoagulant to be approved. Edoxaban is noninferior for efficacy compared to warfarin for both approved indications. Edoxaban is superior to warfarin for the first major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding event in venous thromboembolism and major bleeding in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. Edoxaban is dosed once daily for both indications and requires dose adjustment for renal function. In patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, use is not recommended in patients with a creatinine clearance greater than 95 mL/min due to reduced efficacy. Edoxaban offers a new therapeutic alternative to the currently available options in the market.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Librarian 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 6 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 46%
Neuroscience 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 35%
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 26 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#1,020
of 1,323 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,497
of 314,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
#45
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,323 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.6. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 314,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.