MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2311203793 · doi:10.1007/s11239-015-1309-0

Guidance for the treatment and prevention of obstetric-associated venous thromboembolism

2016· article· en· W2311203793 on OpenAlexafffund
Shannon M. Bates, Saskia Middeldorp, Marc Rodger, Allison James, Ian Greer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaThrombosis and Atherosclerosis Research InstituteMcMaster University
FundersJanssen PharmaceuticalsUniversity of OttawaLEO PharmaPfizerHeart and Stroke Foundation of CanadaDaiichi Sankyo EuropeSanofiEli Lilly CanadaGlaxoSmithKlineDaiichi-SankyoEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary embolismVenous thromboembolismIntensive care medicineDeep veinThrombosisPregnancyExpert opinionVenous thrombosisPopulationSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Venous thromboembolism (VTE), which may manifest as pulmonary embolism (PE) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT), is a serious and potentially fatal condition. Treatment and prevention of obstetric-related VTE is complicated by the need to consider fetal, as well as maternal, wellbeing when making management decisions. Although absolute VTE rates in this population are low, obstetric-associated VTE is an important cause of maternal morbidity and mortality. This manuscript, initiated by the Anticoagulation Forum, provides practical clinical guidance on the prevention and treatment of obstetric-associated VTE based on existing guidelines and consensus expert opinion based on available literature where guidelines are lacking.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0120.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations435
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Thrombosis and ThrombolysisSame topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and ManagementFrench-language works237,207