MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and Safety of the Novel Oral Anticoagulants in Atrial Fibrillation

2012· review· en· W2033102959 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Dentali, Nicoletta Riva, Mark Crowther, Alexander G.G. Turpie, Gregory Y.H. Lip, Walter Ageno

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAtrial fibrillationDabigatranCardiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) have been proposed as alternatives to vitamin K antagonists for the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. Individually, NOACs were at least noninferior to vitamin K antagonists, but a clear superiority in overall and vascular mortality was not consistently proven. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a meta-analysis of phase II and phase III randomized, controlled trials comparing NOACs with vitamin K antagonists in patients with atrial fibrillation. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, supplemented with conference abstract books and www.clinicaltrials.gov, were searched up to the first week of July 2012 with no language restriction. Two reviewers performed independent article review and study quality assessment. Data on overall and cardiovascular mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, ischemic stroke, major and intracranial bleeding, and myocardial infarction were collected. NOACs were pooled to perform a comparison with vitamin K antagonists, calculating pooled relative risks (RRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We retrieved 12 studies (3 administering dabigatran, 4 administering rivaroxaban, 2 administering apixaban, and 3 administering edoxaban) enrolling a total of 54 875 patients. NOACs significantly reduced total mortality (5.61% versus 6.02%; RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.83-0.96), cardiovascular mortality (3.45% versus 3.65%; RR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.82-0.98), and stroke/systemic embolism (2.40% versus 3.13%; RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.86). There was a trend toward reduced major bleeding (RR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72-1.02) with a significant reduction of intracranial hemorrhage (RR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.39-0.56). No difference in myocardial infarction was observed. CONCLUSIONS: NOACs are associated with an overall clinical benefit compared with vitamin K antagonists. Additional research is required to confirm these findings outside the context of randomized trials.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.016
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations380
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207