MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Hemorrhage of Off-Label Use

2011· letter· en· W2063779323 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keyvan Karkouti, Jerrold H. Levy

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Internal Medicine · 2011
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemophilia Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsToronto General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineContext (archaeology)AtlantaFamily medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Letters6 September 2011A Hemorrhage of Off-Label UseKeyvan Karkouti, MD and Jerrold H. Levy, MDKeyvan Karkouti, MDFrom Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4, Canada, and Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322.Search for more papers by this author and Jerrold H. Levy, MDFrom Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4, Canada, and Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-155-5-201109060-00023 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:The editorial comment by Avorn and Kesselheim (1) on recent systematic reviews of off-label use of rFVIIa raises concern about the “rapidly increasing use of a treatment that does not benefit patients and increases the risk for dangerous thrombotic events”—and “costs $10 000 per dose.” This concern, however, fails to consider the clinical context in which clinicians choose to administer rFVIIa, which is during refractory blood loss.When presented with a patient who continues to bleed despite administration of all available therapies, clinicians have 2 choices: Keep administering the standard interventions that have failed to work in that ...References1. Avorn J, Kesselheim A. A hemorrhage of off-label use [Editorial]. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:566-7. [PMID: 21502655] LinkGoogle Scholar2. Logan AC, Yank V, Stafford RS. Off-label use of recombinant factor VIIa in U.S. hospitals: analysis of hospital records. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154:516-22. [PMID: 21502649] LinkGoogle Scholar3. Karkouti K, Beattie WS, Arellano R, Aye T, Bussieres JS, Callum JL, et al. Comprehensive Canadian review of the off-label use of recombinant activated factor VII in cardiac surgery. Circulation. 2008;118:331-8. [PMID: 18606914] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Gill R, Herbertson M, Vuylsteke A, Olsen PS, von Heymann C, Mythen M, et al. Safety and efficacy of recombinant activated factor VII: a randomized placebo-controlled trial in the setting of bleeding after cardiac surgery. Circulation. 2009;120:21-7. [PMID: 19546387] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Levi M, Levy JH, Andersen HF, Truloff D. Safety of recombinant activated factor VII in randomized clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:1791-800. [PMID: 21047223] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2C4, Canada, and Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322.Disclosures: The authors have consulted for and have received research funding from Novo Nordisk. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoOff-Label Use of Recombinant Factor VIIa in U.S. Hospitals: Analysis of Hospital Records Aaron C. Logan , Veronica Yank , and Randall S. Stafford A Hemorrhage of Off-Label Use Jerry Avorn and Aaron Kesselheim A Hemorrhage of Off-Label Use Jerry Avorn and Aaron S. Kesselheim Metrics Cited ByEthics & Evidence in Medical Debates: The Case of Recombinant Activated Factor VIIReview of the Off-Label Use of Recombinant Activated Factor VII in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery PatientsNo evidence or no alternative? Taking responsibility for off-label prescribing 6 September 2011Volume 155, Issue 5Page: 339KeywordsBloodConflicts of interestDrugsHemorrhageResearch fundingSafetySafety studiesSystematic reviews ePublished: 6 September 2011 Issue Published: 6 September 2011 CopyrightCopyright © 2011 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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.093
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.093
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.012

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 head0.183
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Internal MedicineSame topicHemophilia Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207