Review of anticoagulation options for mechanical valve prosthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical guidelines recommend lifelong oral anticoagulation (OAC) with warfarin in all patients with mechanical valves with variance in the target INR for patient associated risk factors, type of mechanical valve or implant position of the valve. Recent randomized controlled trials have demonstrated that clinicians may consider a lower OAC strategy (INR: 1.5–2.5) in low (thrombogenic) risk patients undergoing bileaflet mechanical valve replacement thereby achieving similar thromboprophylaxis yet minimizing bleeding events. Likewise, physicians may also consider a lowered OAC option in high (thrombogenic) risk patients undergoing bileaflet mechanical valve replacement yielding similar efficacy (avoidance of thromboembolic events) and improving safety (bleeding events). Finally, while advancement of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) has been swift in the realm of atrial fibrillation anticoagulation management, NOACs for mechanical valves are currently contraindicated due to evidence of increased thromboembolic and bleeding risk. Future studies comparing NOACs and warfarin along with newer mechanical valve construction are eagerly being awaited.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".