Anticoagulant Prophylaxis for Hospitalized Medical Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters2 October 2007Anticoagulant Prophylaxis for Hospitalized Medical PatientsMark A. Crowther, MD, MSc, Francesco Dentali, MD, Wendy Lim, MD, and James D. Douketis, MDMark A. Crowther, MD, MScFrom McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Francesco Dentali, MDFrom McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, Wendy Lim, MDFrom McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada.Search for more papers by this author, and James D. Douketis, MDFrom McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada.Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00023 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail IN RESPONSE:Dr. Lederle and associates question our conclusion that symptomatic VTE in medical patients is reduced during treatment with prophylactic anticoagulants. We acknowledge that a discussion of these matters is important, because our findings could influence the care of many patients.First, they indicate that Cohen and colleagues (1) did not confirm all fatal PEs with autopsy. They propose that this would overestimate the risk for such events. We included these events because, in accordance with our prespecified criteria, they were independently adjudicated as fatal PEs.Second, they questioned our decision to extract data from only the first 21 ...References1. Cohen AT, Davidson BL, Gallus AS, Lassen MR, Prins MH, Tomkowski W, et al. Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in older acute medical patients: randomised placebo controlled trial. BMJ. 2006;332:325-9. [PMID: 16439370] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar2. Gärdlund B. Randomised, controlled trial of low-dose heparin for prevention of fatal pulmonary embolism in patients with infectious diseases. The Heparin Prophylaxis Study Group. Lancet. 1996;347:1357-61. [PMID: 8637340] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Mahé I, Bergmann JF, d'Azémar P, Vaissie JJ, Caulin C. Lack of effect of a low-molecular-weight heparin (nadroparin) on mortality in bedridden medical in-patients: a prospective randomised double-blind study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2005;61:347-51. [PMID: 15981008] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Mismetti P, Laporte-Simitsidis S, Tardy B, Cucherat M, Buchmüller A, Juillard-Delsart D, et al. Prevention of venous thromboembolism in internal medicine with unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparins: a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials. Thromb Haemost. 2000;83:14-9. [PMID: 10669147] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: From McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 3Z5, Canada. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoMeta-analysis: Anticoagulant Prophylaxis to Prevent Symptomatic Venous Thromboembolism in Hospitalized Medical Patients Francesco Dentali , James D. Douketis , Monica Gianni , Wendy Lim , and Mark A. Crowther Anticoagulant Prophylaxis for Hospitalized Medical Patients Frank A. Lederle , Roderick MacDonald , and Timothy J. Wilt Metrics 2 October 2007Volume 147, Issue 7Page: 524KeywordsAnticoagulantsAutopsyConflicts of interestDeep vein thrombosisForecastingProphylaxisResearch design ePublished: 2 October 2007 Issue Published: 2 October 2007 CopyrightCopyright © 2007 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".