Clinical presentation and therapeutic management of venous thrombosis in young children: a retrospective analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in young children is not well documented. Clinicians from 12 institutions retrospectively evaluated the presentation, therapeutic management, and outcome of VTE in children younger than 2 years seen in 2011–2016. Feasibility of recruiting these children in EINSTEIN-Jr. phase III, a randomized trial evaluating rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation for VTE, was assessed. We identified 346 children with VTE, of whom 227 (65.6%) had central venous catheter-related thrombosis (CVC-VTE), 119 (34.4%) had non-CVC-VTE, and 156 (45.1%) were younger than 1 month. Of the 309 children who received anticoagulant therapy, 86 (27.8%) had a short duration of therapy (i.e. < 6 weeks for CVC-VTE and < 3 months for non-CVC-VTE) and 17 (5.5%) had recurrent VTE during anticoagulation ( n = 8, 2.6%) or shortly after its discontinuation ( n = 9, 2.9%). A total of 37 (10.7%) children did not receive anticoagulant therapy and 4 (10.5%) had recurrent VTE. The average number of children aged < 0.5 years and 0.5–2 years who would have been considered for enrolment in EINSTEIN-Jr is approximately 1.0 and 0.9 per year per site, respectively. Young children with VTE most commonly have CVC-VTE and approximately one-tenth and one-fourth received no or only short durations of anticoagulant therapy, respectively. Recurrent VTE rates without anticoagulation, during anticoagulation or shortly after its discontinuation seem comparable to those observed in adults. Short and flexible treatment durations could potentially increase recruitment in EINSTEIN-Jr. phase III.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".