MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027734712 · doi:10.1159/000217302

Management Of Venous Thromboembolism: Optimization By Clinical Trials

2009· review· en· W2027734712 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHaemostasis · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsHamilton General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAntithromboticDeep veinThrombosisHeparinRegimenAnticoagulantClinical trialRandomized controlled trialVenous thrombosisLow molecular weight heparinSurgeryIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antithrombotic therapy is mandatory in most patients with venous thrombosis. The results of randomized trials have established the requirement for initial treatment with heparin and have determined the optimal anticoagulant regimen for secondary prophylaxis. Recent studies have demonstrated that low molecular weight heparins, that have improved pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties over standard heparin, are effective and safe in the treatment of deep vein thrombosis. Two large randomized clinical trials have shown the feasibility of the outpatient treatment of patients with acute deep vein thrombosis with low molecular weight heparins. Home therapy will result in improved clinical utility of anticoagulant treatment and in cost savings.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.254 · 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