MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2527804880 · doi:10.1007/s40119-016-0071-5

A Prospective, Randomized, Open-Label Study to Evaluate Two Management Strategies for Gastrointestinal Symptoms in Patients Newly on Treatment with Dabigatran

2016· article· en· W2527804880 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology and Therapy · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBoehringer Ingelheim
KeywordsMedicineDabigatranRandomized controlled trialGastrointestinal bleedingIntensive care medicineProspective cohort studyInternal medicineAtrial fibrillationWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: In the pivotal RE-LY trial, dabigatran etexilate (DE) at the dose of 150-mg twice daily (BID), significantly reduced total stroke and ischemic stroke compared with warfarin in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF), while the 110-mg BID dose had efficacy equivalent to warfarin, and major bleeds were significantly reduced. Both DE regimens were generally well tolerated; however, approximately 4% of the patients discontinued treatment with DE due to gastrointestinal (GI) discomfort. METHODS: Clinical trial NCT01493557 was a multicenter, randomized, active control, open-label study to assess the efficacy of two simple GI symptom (GIS) management strategies in DE-treated patients who developed GIS: (1) concurrent treatment with the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole (DE-P), or (2) ingestion of DE after a meal (DE-M). Patients were initially randomized to either GIS management strategy. If the first did not resolve their GIS, patients had the option to "add on" the alternative strategy. RESULTS: A total of 1067 patients with NVAF received DE therapy BID for 3 months (United States, 150-mg or 75-mg; Canada, 150-mg or 110-mg). Of these, 117 (11%) patients reported GIS and were randomized to one of two GIS management strategies. At 4 weeks, a significantly higher rate of complete or partial effectiveness was observed in patients on DE-P than in those receiving DE-M, [50/58 (86.2%) versus 40/59 (67.8%), respectively; p = 0.0273]. Patients with ongoing GIS were asked to "add on" the alternate strategy for an additional 4 weeks. Overall, 92/117 (78.6%) of randomized patients experienced complete or partial effectiveness using either the initial strategy or a combination of the two strategies: DE-P, 47 (81.0%); and DE-M, 45 (76.3%, no significant difference) (by initial strategy). CONCLUSION: The majority of patients enrolled either did not experience GIS at all, or their GIS resolved using either one individually, or a combination of the two strategies described. TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01493557.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.358

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.308 · 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