Injected Versus Oral Deep Vein Thrombosis Prophylactic Therapy: A Patient Satisfaction Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite much information on different chemoprophylaxis regimens, there remains a paucity of literature with respect to risk stratification and appropriate patient selection for the appropriate AbstractDeep vein thrombosis (DVT) is a serious complication of total knee replacement (TKA).While the need for post op prophylaxis is accepted, controversy exists as to which regimen(s) to use.ASA use has seen resurgence due to its efficacy, safety profile, and easy administration.To date no study has evaluated patient satisfaction and compliance with ASA chemoprophylaxis after TKA.Ninety-six TKA patients were surveyed after randomization to receive either oral ASA or injected low molecular weight heparin.Satisfaction was significantly greater in the ASA group.Confidence in treatment was equivalent between the groups.Patient satisfaction withanticoagulation after TKA should not be overlooked.We have demonstrated increased satisfaction with ASA treatment without affecting perceptions of efficacy.Our findings should be considered when prescribing postoperative prophylaxis
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".