Meta-Regression Analysis to Indirectly Compare Prophylaxis With Dalteparin or Enoxaparin in Patients at High Risk for Venous Thromboembolic Events
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dalteparin and enoxaparin are recommended as thromboprophylaxis for at least 10 days in patients undergoing abdominal surgery (AS) or hospitalized patients with acute medical illnesses. Even though both agents have proven clinical effectiveness through randomized trials, there have been no head-to-head studies. In this evaluation, indirect statistical techniques were used to compare safety and efficacy between dalteparin and enoxaparin in these 2 high-risk patient populations. METHODS: A literature search was conducted from January 1980 to November 2010 for randomized trials evaluating dalteparin or enoxaparin prophylaxis following AS or in hospitalized patients. Binary outcomes for safety and efficacy were statistically pooled using fixed or random effects models in cases of significant heterogeneity. In trials where a common control was used (eg, unfractionated heparin [UH]), indirect statistical comparisons between dalteparin and enoxaparin were performed using meta-regression analysis with active drug as the primary independent variable. RESULTS: The meta-analysis in AS patients showed that enoxaparin or dalteparin had comparable efficacy to UH in terms of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs; relative risk reduction [RR] = 0.87, P = .46). The indirect statistical comparison was unable to find significant differences between enoxaparin and dalteparin in terms of risk for VTE (P = .84), major bleeding (P = .38), heparin-induced thrombocytopenia ([HIT]; P = .084), or death (P = .97). In acutely ill medical patients, treatment with enoxaparin or dalteparin had a 52% VTE risk reduction compared to placebo (RR = 0.48, P < .001). The indirect comparison was also unable to find significant differences between enoxaparin and dalteparin in terms of VTEs (P = .15), major bleeds (P = .39), HIT (P = .48), and death (P = .41). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest comparable safety and efficacy between dalteparin and enoxaparin in AS and in acutely ill medical patients.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".