Influence of Warfarin on Symptoms of Fatigue: Findings of a Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Some patients develop fatigue while taking warfarin, but causality is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess whether warfarin use is associated with fatigue. METHODS: This investigation was a substudy of a randomized double-blind trial in 13 outpatient thromboembolism clinics. Subjects who had received one month of open-label warfarin therapy for venous thromboembolism due to a transient risk factor were randomly assigned to receive warfarin or placebo for 2 months and followed for another 9 months after stopping the study drug. Fatigue was measured using a Likert scale, and change of fatigue was measured by the patient's global rating. RESULTS: In 87 subjects, the overall ratings of fatigue were 0.1 unit lower (95% CI 0.6 units lower to 0.4 units higher) while taking warfarin. Global rating for change in fatigue intensity showed no increase of fatigue with warfarin use. CONCLUSIONS: The short-term use of warfarin was not associated with symptoms of fatigue.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".