MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409964874 · doi:10.2147/dddt.s505751

Bibliometric Analysis of Non-Vitamin K Antagonist Oral Anticoagulants (NOACS) in the Prevention of Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism

2025· review· en· W4409964874 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDrug Design Development and Therapy · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceCentral South UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsVitamin K antagonistMedicinePulmonary embolismVenous thrombosisVitamin kVenous thromboembolismThrombosisIntensive care medicineInternal medicineWarfarinAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of cardiovascular-related deaths. Non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) offer effective therapy without injections or blood monitoring. This bibliometric analysis explores the research on NOACs for preventing VTE and pulmonary embolism. Methods: Literature up to July 20, 2024, was searched in Web of Science Core Collection. Citespace software was used for screening and analysis. Results: In this study, we analyzed 2124 articles and 767 reviews from 11,282 institutions across 528 countries and regions, encompassing 830 publications and 60 research directions. The USA led in publication count, followed by Germany and Canada. Cardiovascular System Cardiology, Hematology, and General Internal Medicine were the top research areas, while THROMBOSIS AND HAEMOSTASIS was the leading journal. From 2004 to 2024, we observed accelerated publication growth, particularly from 2008, highlighting the emergence of NOACs as a major research focus. Key contributors, including Bengt I. Eriksson, and major institutions like Harvard Medical School and University of Amsterdam, played pivotal roles in advancing anticoagulant research. Co-citation and keyword clustering analyses revealed research hotspots in NOACs, cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, stroke prevention, and COVID-19-related thrombotic events, reflecting a shift towards individualized anticoagulation therapy and the growing importance of NOACs in various clinical contexts. Conclusion: The development of NOACs has progressed rapidly, with an increasing number of publications, indicating the lead research in the United States and other Western nations. Comparative studies on the safety and efficacy of NOACs have become a significant focus, shifting from traditional anticoagulants. Pharmacogenetics-guided use of NOACS shows new hope of precision medicine.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Bibliometrics
Consensus categoriesBibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0320.042
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it