Risk of recurrence after venous thromboembolism in men and women: patient level meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of sex on the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism in all patients and in patients with venous thromboembolism that was unprovoked or provoked (by non-hormonal factors). Data source Comprehensive search of electronic databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) until July 2010, supplemented by review of conference abstracts and contact with content experts. STUDY SELECTION: Seven prospective studies investigating an association between D-dimer, measured after anticoagulation was stopped, and disease recurrence in patients with venous thromboembolism. DATA EXTRACTION: Patient level databases were obtained, transferred to a central database, checked, and completed with further information provided by authors. DATA SYNTHESIS: 2554 patients with a first venous thromboembolism had follow-up for a mean of 27.1 (SD 19.6) months. The one year incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism was 5.3% (95% confidence interval 4.1% to 6.7%) in women and 9.5% (7.9% to 11.4%) in men, and the three year incidence of recurrence was 9.1% (7.3% to 11.3%) in women and 19.7% (16.5% to 23.4%) in men. Among patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism, men had a higher risk of recurrence than did women (hazard ratio 2.2, 95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.8). After adjustment for women with hormone associated initial venous thromboembolism, the risk of recurrence remained higher in men (hazard ratio 1.8, 1.4 to 2.5). In patients with provoked venous thromboembolism, occurring after exposure to a major risk factor, recurrence of disease did not differ between men and women (hazard ratio 1.2, 0.6 to 2.4). In women with hormone associated venous thromboembolism and no other risk factors, recurrence was lower than that in women with unprovoked venous thromboembolism and no previous hormone use (hazard ratio 0.5, 0.3 to 0.8). CONCLUSION: In patients with a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism, men have a 2.2-fold higher risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism than do women, which remained 1.8-fold higher in men after adjustment for previous hormone associated venous thromboembolism in women. In patients with a first provoked venous thromboembolism, risk of recurrence does not differ between men and women with or without hormone associated venous thromboembolism. Indefinite anticoagulation may be given greater consideration in men than in women after a first venous thromboembolism.
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 | 0.012 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.054 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; 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".