Risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage with long term use of aspirin: Meta-analysis

British Medical Journal

Volumn 321, Issue 7270, 2000, Pages 1183-1187

  Derry, S ^a   Loke, Y K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; PLACEBO;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG FORMULATION; DRUG INDUCED DISEASE; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL HEMORRHAGE; HUMAN; LONG TERM CARE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; META ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL;

EID: 0034638656     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.321.7270.1183     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. The gastrointestinal toxicity of aspirin: An overview of randomised controlled trials
2. Probability of adverse events that have not yet occurred: A statistical reminder
3. Risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding with aspirin
4. Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy - 1: Prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration
5. Optimal search strategies for RCTs. Cochrane reviewers' handbook 4.0 (appendix 5c)
6. Conventional search strategies cannot easily identify those trials of drug therapy which provide quantitative adverse effects data
7. Much ado about nothing: Meta-analysis for rare events
8. She 23: Meta-analysis regression
9. Quantitative estimation of rare adverse events which follow a biological progression: A new model applied to chronic NSAID use
10. Prophylactic aspirin and risk of peptic ulcer bleeding
11. Risk of aspirin-associated major upper-gastrointestinal bleeding with enteric-coated or buffered product
12. A comparison of two doses of aspirin (30 mg vs 283 mg a day) in patients after a transient ischemic attack or minor ischemic stroke
13. Nonparametric 'trim and fill' method for accounting for publication bias in meta-analysis