MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Effect of Perioperative Aspirin Therapy in Peripheral Vascular Surgery: A Decision Analysis

2001· review· en· W2074602758 on OpenAlexaff
David Neilipovitz, Gregory L. Bryson, Graham Nichol

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesia & Analgesia · 2001
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAspirinPerioperativeLife expectancySurgeryMyocardial infarctionIncidence (geometry)AnesthesiaInternal medicinePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients who undergo infrainguinal revascularization surgery are at increased risk for perioperative thrombotic complications. Aspirin decreases thrombotic events in the nonoperative setting; however, aspirin is often discontinued to avoid perioperative hemorrhagic complications. We used a decision analysis to determine whether aspirin should be discontinued before infrainguinal revascularization surgery. Two strategies were compared: aspirin cessation 2 wk before surgery and aspirin continuation throughout the perioperative period. Clinical events examined included myocardial infarction, thrombotic cerebrovascular accident, hemorrhagic cerebrovascular accident, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, and incisional hemorrhagic complications. Event rates and effect of aspirin were obtained by using MEDLINE. The outcomes were perioperative mortality, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life expectancy. According to the model, continued aspirin use decreased perioperative mortality rates from 2.78% to 2.05%. Continued aspirin use increased life expectancy from 14.83 to 14.89 yr and increased quality-adjusted life expectancy from 14.72 to 14.79 yr. Aspirin increased the number of hemorrhagic complications by 2.46%, primarily because of an increased incidence of non-life-threatening complications.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.009
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations84
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesia & AnalgesiaSame topicCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesFrench-language works237,207