Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bleeding ulcer is a common condition, especially among the elderly population. Tranexamic acid (TXA) has been successfully used for many bleeding conditions. Its use in patients with bleeding ulcer is inclusive yet. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the prescription of TXA. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was performed as a review of medical records at the Surgery Department, University Hospital in Linkoping. Patients with complete esophagogastroduodenoscopy and ulcer disease were included and divided on the basis of treatment with TXA or not. Differences between the groups were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The main part of the prescription of TXA, 65%, occurred during 2010 and 2011, and 35% between 2012 and 2013 (P < 0.05). In the group treated with TXA, 84% needed blood transfusion, compared to 64% in the control group (P = 0.039). Of the patients treated with TXA, 18% were re-bleeding compared to 14% of the controls (P = 0.594). Median value for days at hospital was 5 in the tranexamic group and 3 in the control group (P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: The prescription of TXA has declined between 2010 and 2013. TXA was more often prescribed to patients with more severe gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding ulcer disease. Further investigation is needed to conclude the significance of tranexamic acid in patients with GI bleeding ulcer disease.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".