Abstract WMP85: Clinical Effectiveness of Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOACs) vs. Warfarin in Older Ischemic Stroke Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: Findings From Patient-Centered Research Into Outcomes Stroke Patients Prefer and Effectiveness Research (PROSPER) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are increasingly used as alternatives to warfarin for secondary prevention in ischemic stroke patients with atrial fibrillation. Despite demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials, there are few real-world experiences of DOACs vs. warfarin in community practice. Methods: We analyzed ischemic stroke survivors with atrial fibrillation discharged from the Get With The Guidelines Stroke hospitals between 2011-2014 and linked to Medicare claims for longitudinal outcomes through 2015. A propensity score overlap weighting method was used to compare DOACs vs. warfarin. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and home time, a patient-centered outcome reflecting desire of “being alive at home, without recurrent stroke, or being hospitalized for complications.” Results: Among 11,662 stroke survivors (median age 80), 4,041 (34.7%) were discharged on DOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, or apixaban) and 7,621 on warfarin. Except for NIHSS (median 4 [IQR 1-9] vs. 5 [2-11]), baseline demographics, medical history, and clinical characteristics were similar between two cohorts. Compared with warfarin, patients discharged on DOACs were less likely to experience MACE (33.95% vs. 40.36% per year, adjusted hazard ratio 0.89, 99% CI 0.83-0.96) and had more days at home (mean 287 vs. 263 days during the first year post discharge, adjusted difference 15.6 days, 99% CI 9.0-22.1) ( Table ). Additionally, there were fewer deaths, all-cause readmissions, cardiovascular readmissions, hemorrhagic strokes, and bleeding hospitalizations in DOAC-treated patients, although no significant differences in fatal bleeding, ischemic stroke readmission, systemic embolism, pneumonia, or sepsis (two negative outcome controls) between the two cohorts. Conclusions: In ischemic stroke survivors with atrial fibrillation, DOACs were associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes compared with warfarin.
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 | 0.026 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".