The evidence for the use of recombinant factor VIIa in massive bleeding: revision of the transfusion policy framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2006, the Canadian National Advisory Committee on Blood and Blood Products (NAC) developed a transfusion policy framework for the use of off-label recombinant factor VIIa (rFVIIa) in massive bleeding. Because the number of randomised controlled trials has doubled, the NAC undertook a review of the policy framework in 2011. On the basis of the review of 29 randomised controlled trials, there remains little evidence to support the routine use of rFVIIa in massive bleeding. Mortality benefits have not been demonstrated. Contrarily, an increase in arterial thromboembolic events has been observed with the use of off-label rFVIIa. Given the absence of evidence of benefit and with evidence of the risk of harm, the NAC recommends that recombinant VIIa no longer be used for the off-label indications of prevention and treatment of bleeding in patients without haemophilia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".