Antithrombotic Therapy in Secondary Stroke Prevention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ischemic stroke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. The choice of antithrombotic therapy is largely dependent on the type of stroke. In this article, the authors focus on the secondary prevention of stroke, providing evidence from the literature. The mechanism of action of each of the antithrombotic drugs is discussed. Anticoagulation with warfarin for cardioembolic stroke, particularly atrial fibrillation, is strongly recommended, while no clear advantage for warfarin over aspirin exists for ischemic stroke secondary to atherothrombotic or patent foramen ovale. Combination therapies of aspirin plus warfarin do not offer any additional therapeutic benefit and carry an increased risk of hemorrhage. Aspirin and clopidogrel present similar risks for stroke recurrence. The combination of aspirin with extended-release dipyridamole has a lower risk of stroke than aspirin alone and does not enhance the risk of hemorrhage. Finally, some recommendations and future perspectives are included.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".