MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133686162 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1006885

Apixaban versus Enoxaparin for Thromboprophylaxis after Hip Replacement

2010· article· en· W2133686162 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineApixabanSurgeryPulmonary embolismDeep veinThrombosisEnoxaparin sodiumAnesthesiaInternal medicineLow molecular weight heparinWarfarinRivaroxabanAtrial fibrillation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: There are various regimens for thromboprophylaxis after hip replacement. Low-molecular-weight heparins such as enoxaparin predominantly inhibit factor Xa but also inhibit thrombin to some degree. Orally active, specific factor Xa inhibitors such as apixaban may provide effective thromboprophylaxis with a lower risk of bleeding and improved ease of use. METHODS: In this double-blind, double-dummy study, we randomly assigned 5407 patients undergoing total hip replacement to receive apixaban at a dose of 2.5 mg orally twice daily or enoxaparin at a dose of 40 mg subcutaneously every 24 hours. Apixaban therapy was initiated 12 to 24 hours after closure of the surgical wound; enoxaparin therapy was initiated 12 hours before surgery. Prophylaxis was continued for 35 days after surgery, followed by bilateral venographic studies. The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of asymptomatic or symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis, nonfatal pulmonary embolism, or death from any cause during the treatment period. Patients were followed for an additional 60 days after the last intended dose of study medication. RESULTS: A total of 1949 patients in the apixaban group (72.0%) and 1917 patients in the enoxaparin group (71.0%) could be evaluated for the primary efficacy analysis. The primary efficacy outcome occurred in 27 patients in the apixaban group (1.4%) and in 74 patients in the enoxaparin group (3.9%) (relative risk with apixaban, 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22 to 0.54; P<0.001 for both noninferiority and superiority; absolute risk reduction, 2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 1.5 to 3.5). The composite outcome of major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 129 of 2673 patients assigned to apixaban (4.8%) and 134 of 2659 assigned to enoxaparin (5.0%) (absolute difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.4 to 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing hip replacement, thromboprophylaxis with apixaban, as compared with enoxaparin, was associated with lower rates of venous thromboembolism, without increased bleeding. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00423319.).

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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