MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

<scp>d</scp>-Dimer and Venous Thromboembolism

2004· article· en· W2039722243 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Russell D. Hull, William A. Ghali, Rollin Brant, Paul D. Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfidence intervalSAINTDemographyInternal medicineArt historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters21 September 2004d-Dimer and Venous ThromboembolismRussell D. Hull, MBBS, MSc, William A. Ghali, MD, Rollin F. Brant, PhD, MPH, and Paul D. Stein, MDRussell D. Hull, MBBS, MScFrom University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 2T9, Canada, and Saint Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, MI 48341.Search for more papers by this author, William A. Ghali, MDFrom University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 2T9, Canada, and Saint Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, MI 48341.Search for more papers by this author, Rollin F. Brant, PhD, MPHFrom University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 2T9, Canada, and Saint Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, MI 48341.Search for more papers by this author, and Paul D. Stein, MDFrom University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 2T9, Canada, and Saint Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, MI 48341.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-141-6-200409210-00022 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:Dr. Wolf has identified the upper 95% confidence limit for the quantitative rapid ELISA's negative likelihood ratio from the sensitivity analysis. The lower 95% confidence limit was 0.00, which is statistically as likely as the value for the upper 95% limit. Both of these extreme values are unlikely to occur clinically. The sensitivity analysis provided a central estimate of 0.05, which is consistent with the primary analyses. It should be noted that the value for sensitivity in the sensitivity analysis was 0.98, with a 95% confidence limit of 0.88 to 1.00, a much narrower range of values than ...Reference1. Perrier A, Roy PM, Aujesky D, Chagnon I, Howarth N, Gourdier AL, et al . Diagnosing pulmonary embolism in outpatients with clinical assessment, D-dimer measurement, venous ultrasound, and helical computed tomography: a multicenter management study. Am J Med. 2004;116:291-9. [PMID: 14984813] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta T2N 2T9, Canada, and Saint Joseph Mercy Oakland, Pontiac, MI 48341. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee Alsod-Dimer for the Exclusion of Acute Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism Paul D. Stein , Russell D. Hull , Kalpesh C. Patel , Ronald E. Olson , William A. Ghali , Rollin Brant , Rita K. Biel , Vinay Bharadia , and Neeraj K. Kalra d-Dimer and Venous Thromboembolism Stephen J. Wolf d-Dimer and Venous Thromboembolism Grégoire Le Gal , Marc Righini , and Henri Bounameaux d-Dimer and Venous Thromboembolism John T. Philbrick , Steven Heim , and Joel M. Schectman d-Dimer and Venous Thromboembolism Fabio Puglisi and Edda Federico Metrics 21 September 2004Volume 141, Issue 6Page: 483KeywordsConfidence limitD-dimerEnzyme linked immunosorbent assayLikelihood ratioOutpatientsPulmonary embolismQuantitative analysisSpecificityUltrasound imagingVenous thromboembolism ePublished: 21 September 2004 Issue Published: 21 September 2004 CopyrightCopyright © 2004 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF DownloadLoading ...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.607

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1820.028

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal Medicine→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→