MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896279818 · doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2018.10.002

Healthcare resource use in XALIA: A subgroup analysis of a non-interventional study of rivaroxaban versus standard anticoagulation for deep vein thrombosis

2018· article· en· W2896279818 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Internal Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
FundersJanssen Scientific AffairsBayer
KeywordsMedicineRivaroxabanDeep veinThrombosisConfidence intervalSurgeryInternal medicineAtrial fibrillationWarfarin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The non-interventional XALIA study compared the safety and effectiveness of rivaroxaban with standard anticoagulation for the treatment of venous thromboembolism in routine clinical practice. This substudy assessed the effect of treatment with rivaroxaban on healthcare resource use, hospital length of stay (LOS) and frequency of hospitalisation. METHODS: In XALIA, patients aged ≥18 years scheduled to receive ≥3 months of rivaroxaban or standard anticoagulation treatment for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) were eligible. Treatment decisions were at the physician's discretion. Healthcare resource use, including hospital admission for the index DVT and initial LOS, was documented. The main analyses in this substudy were conducted in a 1:1 propensity score-matched set (PMS) of patients, with adjustment for cancer at baseline. RESULTS: In the PMS analysis, 1124 rivaroxaban-treated patients and 1124 standard anticoagulation-treated patients were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups (mean age 60.8 years vs. 61.2 years, DVT only rates of 89.7% vs. 90.2% and cancer rates of 8.4% vs. 8.5%, respectively). Of these, 433/1124 (38.5%) rivaroxaban-treated patients and 438/1124 (39.0%) standard anticoagulation-treated patients were hospitalised. Index event LOS in the PMS analysis was a least-squares mean of 2.6 days shorter with rivaroxaban vs. standard anticoagulation (5.4 vs. 8.0 days; geometric means ratio = 0.67 [95% confidence interval 0.61-0.74, P < 0.001]). CONCLUSIONS: In XALIA, hospital LOS was shorter with rivaroxaban than with standard anticoagulation, consistent with the phase III study results. DVT treatment with rivaroxaban in routine clinical practice may reduce the cost per patient vs. standard anticoagulation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.301 · 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