Bivalirudin in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: for better or worse?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bivalirudin and heparin are the major available parenteral anticoagulants for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Even though hard clinical outcomes are comparable with both drugs, bivalirudin appears to be safer (less bleeding events) at the expense of lower short-term efficacy (more acute stent thrombosis events). The selection of anticoagulation during PCI in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction should be individualized, taking into account the patient's ischemic and bleeding risk. In patients with increased bleeding risk, bivalirudin might be preferable to heparin, whereas in complex PCI with increased risk for stent thrombosis, heparin is preferable. Further clinical studies are needed to elucidate the role of these drugs in PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction in the era of radial approaches, new potent antiplatelet agents and the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".