Treatment of a long-acting anticoagulant rodenticide poisoning cohort with vitamin K1 during the maintenance period
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, there are few guidelines for the use of vitamin K1 in the maintenance treatment of long-acting anticoagulant rodenticide (LAAR) poisonings. We explored factors in the treatment of LAAR poisoning during the maintenance period in order to suggest feasible treatment models.Data from 24 cases of anticoagulant rodenticide poisoning in our hospital were collected from January 2013 to May 2016. The patients' sex, age, coagulation function, total time from poisoning to treatment with vitamin K1 (prehospital time), vitamin K1 sustained treatment time (VKSTT), anticoagulant rodenticide category, and specific poison dosage were collected. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate the correlation between vitamin K1 dosage and other factors during the maintenance period.Only VKSTT (partial regression coefficient -1.133, 0.59, P = 0.035) had an obvious influence on the therapeutic dose of vitamin K1 required during the maintenance period.After an initial pulse therapy, the bleeding and coagulation functions were stabilized, and the patients were subsequently treated with vitamin K1 during the maintenance period. Over time, the maintenance dose of vitamin K1 (10-120 mg/d, intravenous drip) was gradually decreased and was not related to toxicant concentration.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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".