Anticoagulation in Patients Aged ≥75 years with Atrial Fibrillation: Role of Novel Oral Anticoagulants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important cause of preventable, disabling stroke and is increasingly prevalent with advancing age. As life expectancies increase around the world, AF-related stroke is a growing global public health concern. Most AF patients are elderly (≥75 years old) and increasing age is a consistent independent risk factor for AF-associated stroke. Warfarin anticoagulation is highly effective for stroke prevention in AF patients, but is underutilized especially in the elderly. Although elderly patients are at increased risk of hemorrhage with oral anticoagulants, the benefit for ischemic stroke reduction exceeds the risk of hemorrhage for most elderly patients. Consequently, age alone should not be considered a contraindication for anticoagulation. Novel oral anticoagulants such as dabigatran, rivaroxaban and apixaban are at least as effective as warfarin in preventing strokes in patients with AF. Relative to warfarin, these novel agents reduce the risk of intracranial hemorrhage, the most devastating complication of anticoagulation therapy in elderly AF patients. The novel oral anticoagulants are especially appealing for stroke prevention in elderly patients with AF.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".