Oral rivaroxaban for the prevention of symptomatic venous thromboembolism after elective hip and knee replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A once-daily dose of rivaroxaban 10 mg, an oral, direct Factor Xa inhibitor, was compared with enoxaparin 40 mg subcutaneously once daily for prevention of venous thromboembolism in three studies of patients undergoing elective hip and knee replacement (RECORD programme). A pooled analysis of data from these studies (n = 9581) showed that rivaroxaban was more effective than enoxaparin in reducing the incidence of the composite of symptomatic venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality at two weeks (0.4% vs 0.8%, respectively, odds ratio 0.44; 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.79; p = 0.005), and at the end of the planned medication period (0.5% vs 1.3%, respectively; odds ratio 0.38; 95% confidence interval 0.22 to 0.62; p < 0.001). The rate of major bleeding was similar at two weeks (0.2% for both) and at the end of the planned medication period (0.3% vs 0.2%). Rivaroxaban started six to eight hours after surgery was more effective than enoxaparin started the previous evening in preventing symptomatic venous thromboembolism and all-cause mortality, without increasing major bleeding.
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 | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".