COMPASS for Vascular Surgeons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To suggest a practical approach for the application of data from the Cardiovascular Outcomes for People Using Anticoagulation Strategies (COMPASS) trial in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD). RECENT FINDINGS: The COMPASS trial showed that low-dose rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily plus daily aspirin was superior to aspirin alone in reducing major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, and major adverse limb events among patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease, including those with PAD. The risk for major bleeding, however, was higher with rivaroxaban plus aspirin. Critical limb ischemia at baseline (rest pain, ulcer, or gangrene), previous limb or foot amputation, or a history of peripheral revascularization surgery or stenting were independently associated with increased major adverse limb events within the trial. SUMMARY: Intensification of antithrombotic therapy with low-dose rivaroxaban plus aspirin should be considered in low bleeding risk PAD patients who are at increased risk for ischemic and/or limb events. A practical approach for clinicians is presented to help incorporate COMPASS data into practice.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.106 | 0.052 |
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".