MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121643722 · doi:10.1160/th07-08-0500

Treatment of pulmonary embolism: The use of low-molecularweight heparin in the inpatient and outpatient settings

2008· review· en· W2121643722 on OpenAlexaff
Russell D. Hull

Bibliographic record

VenueThrombosis and Haemostasis · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsFoothills Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismHeparinIntensive care medicineLow molecular weight heparinAnticoagulantThrombosisEmergency medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pulmonary embolism (PE) remains a major clinical problem associated with considerable mortality and morbidity. In patients with PE, appropriate anticoagulant therapy has been shown to significantly reduce both recurrence and mortality. Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) is at least as effective as unfractionated heparin (UFH) in the treatment of PE, with a similar risk of bleeding. Furthermore, LMWH offers more predictable pharmacokinetics and anticoagulant effects. As a result, current guidelines from both the American College of Chest Physicians and the joint American College of Physicians/American Academy of Family Physicians recommend the use of LMWH over UFH (in patients with submassive PE). Outpatient treatment with LMWH has been shown to be feasible in many patients, and offers the potential for cost-savings and improvements in health-related quality of life. Further data are needed to support an evidence-based recommendation for the use of LMWH in the outpatient treatment of PE.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
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

Citations25
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThrombosis and HaemostasisSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207