↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Cost-Effectiveness of Dabigatran versus Genotype-Guided Management of Warfarin Therapy for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 Mendeley
Title
Cost-Effectiveness of Dabigatran versus Genotype-Guided Management of Warfarin Therapy for Stroke Prevention in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation
Published in
PLOS ONE, June 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0039640
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joyce H. S. You, Kia K. N. Tsui, Raymond S. M. Wong, Gergory Cheng

Abstract

Dabigatran is associated with lower rate of stroke comparing to warfarin when anticoagulation control is sub-optimal. Genotype-guided warfarin dosing and management may improve patient-time in target range (TTR) and therefore affect the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran compared with warfain. We examined the cost-effectiveness of dabigatran versus warfarin therapy with genotype-guided management in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 4%
Slovenia 1 <1%
Unknown 103 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 22%
Researcher 19 18%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 8%
Student > Postgraduate 8 7%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 50 46%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 8 7%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Other 11 10%
Unknown 21 19%