Outpatient treatment of venous thromboembolic disease based in an emergency department
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The efficacy, safety, and patient satisfaction of an emergency department (ED)-based outpatient program providing treatment for venous thromboembolic disease (VTD) were studied. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of patients enrolled in a hospital outpatient VTD treatment program was conducted from June 1999 to September 2003. Endpoints included recurrent VTD at three and six months following discharge from the program, minor and major bleeding, and thrombocytopenia during the acute phase of therapy. Patient satisfaction was assessed with an 18-question survey that was mailed to all patients following discharge from the program. RESULTS: A total of 162 patients were included. Of the 142 evaluable patients, no patient experienced recurrent VTD at three months, while at six months, 2 patients (1.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-5.0%) had recurrence. No patient experienced major bleeding or thrombocytopenia, while 4 (2.5%; 95% CI, 0.8-6.2%) had minor bleeding. Ninety-seven percent of the patients were comfortable having their condition treated on an outpatient basis, and 85.1% felt it was more convenient to return to the hospital daily for medications and assessment than to be admitted to the hospital. Overall, 97.7% of the respondents were satisfied or very satisfied with the treatment received in the outpatient program, and 94.0% said they would enroll again if future treatment was indicated. CONCLUSION: An ED-based outpatient VTD treatment program was safe and effective and appeared to achieve a high level of patient satisfaction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".