Randomized controlled trials of new oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The prevalence of atrial fibrillation is increasing because of an aging population. Vitamin K antagonists have been the standard therapy for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation but are underutilized and often poorly managed because of their inherent limitations. This study critically reviews the recently completed phase 3 randomized controlled trials of new oral anticoagulants (OACs) for stroke prevention in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation: RE-LY (dabigatran), AVERROES (apixaban), ARISTOTLE (apixaban) and ROCKET-AF (rivaroxaban). RECENT FINDINGS: On the basis of their favorable pharmacological characteristics and excellent efficacy and safety profile as demonstrated by the results of the randomized controlled trials, the new OACs have the potential to replace vitamin K antagonists as the first-line treatment for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, with warfarin reserved for patients with contraindications to the new OACs and those unable to afford them. SUMMARY: The new OACs represent a major advance for patients with atrial fibrillation with the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality due to cardioembolic stroke.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".