CHAMGAP
VERIFIEDPassed the Codex final verification and publication gate. Evidence-verification cutoff: 2026-08-26. AI was used for research and drafting; the existence of all 1 cited sources was verified at the original page, followed by blind grading, adversarial audit, and build validation. Methodology v0.8.
Verdict No. 2881 · Search date 2026-08-26 · Methodology v0.8

Dabigatran,
does it really help with Noninferior prevention of six-month recurrent acute venous thromboembolism or related death versus warfarin?

30-Second Summary
B
Evidence Grade B · 72 · Safety caution
Dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for six-month recurrent VTE or related death
Major bleeding was 1.6% versus 1.9%; anticoagulation still requires bleeding-risk monitoring.
What the
research shows
Grade B. Events occurred in 30/1274 (2.4%) versus 27/1265 (2.1%), an absolute difference of 0.4 points (95% CI -0.8 to 1.5). The upper risk-difference and hazard-ratio limits were below the prespecified margins of 3.6 points and 2.75.
What the
ads claim
Pradaxa is prescribed in Korea, but this result concerns six-month treatment noninferiority, not superiority for every thrombotic condition.
*

Useful facts when choosing a product

  • Dabigatran is a direct thrombin inhibitor.
  • Initial parenteral anticoagulation lasted a median nine days.
  • Bleeding risk, renal function, and interactions require review.
Gap Measurement · Verdict 2881 · B 72
What advertising claims
What independent, higher-quality research supports
△ GAP
01

What the research actually shows

Four gates: ① Defect: noninferiority design. ② Noninferiority design is a listed item. ③ The paper states "randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial"; margins were "2.75" and "3.6 percentage points." ④ A superiority design could answer this question, so this one avoidable defect gives B1. Replacing effective standard anticoagulation with placebo in acute VTE is ethically impossible, so use of an active control is not counted as a defect.

02

Why this is classified as B (72)

The hard endpoint (H), clinically meaningful effect (E+), and large hard-outcome trial are three strengths. R1 and B1 each cap the grade at B, producing B, 72. It is not A because there is only one confirmatory trial (R1) and developer funding (I0).

Counterpoint. Noninferiority does not show superiority.

Rejudgment record. Axes and scorer agree — Prespecified RE-COVER noninferiority margins and observed recurrent VTE or related death

Scoring profile behind this grade
EndpointHHard endpoint - actual events such as death
ReplicationR1Single confirmatory trial
IndependenceI0Evidence comes only from manufacturer studies
Effect sizeE+Meets the clinically important threshold

The scoring table and the verdict agree (B).

Sub-claim grades by effect

This ingredient is marketed for several effects. A single overall grade blends strong and weak claims together, so each effect is graded separately here. The overall grade reflects the strongest disconfirming or core claim.

Effect (sub-claim)GradeBasis
Six-month noninferiority versus warfarinBBoth prespecified margins were met.

Cross-check — AI research and Codex final gate

AI was used for research and drafting. Blind grading, adversarial audit, and the methodology boundary rules were then reapplied before Codex performed the final evidence, grade, copy, and build checks. If a grade cannot be narrowed, both evidence positions and their reasons are published.
03

Evidence Table

StudyDesignSampleFundingEndpointResultWeight
Study 1Multicenter double-blind, double-dummy randomized noninferiority trial1265Funded, designed, conducted, and analyzed by Boehringer Ingelheim with the steering committeeSymptomatic objectively confirmed recurrent VTE or related death within six months30/1274 (2.4%) vs 27/1265 (2.1%); difference 0.4 points (95% CI -0.8 to 1.5); HR upper bound 1.70, within margins 2.75 and 3.6 pointsPivotal large hard-outcome evidence
§

Receipt — 1 References

All 1 cited sources were verified for existence at the original page (as of 2026-08-26).

Schulman S, Kearon C, Kakkar AK, et al. Dabigatran versus Warfarin in the Treatment of Acute Venous Thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:2342-2352. PMID: 19966341.
checked
Research and draft: AI used · Cross-check: blind grading and adversarial audit
Final verification and publication gate: Codex · Verification cutoff: 2026-08-26 · Corrections: none

Cite this verdict

Benefit of Dabigatran for Noninferior 6-Month Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism or Related Death Evidence Grade B card
[Chamgap] Benefit of Dabigatran for Noninferior 6-Month Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism or Related Death — Evidence Grade B·72. 1 cited sources checked. Source: https://chamgap.com/en/verdicts/heart/dabigatran-acute-vte-six-month-recurrence/ · CC BY 4.0

CC BY 4.0 — free to use with attribution; do not distort grades, numbers, or verdict meaning.

!

What this document does and does not do

Chamgap is an information source. It reports what research has and has not confirmed; it does not tell readers what to take or buy. That decision belongs to readers and, when needed, medical or legal professionals. This verdict reflects literature available up to the search date and may change as new research appears. Nothing here is medical advice.