Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this review we discuss the evolving literature of anticoagulation in the context of the nephrology patient. Whereas CKD patients with atrial fibrillation, should be anticoagulated, the benefit of anticoagulation for those on dialysis remains controversial due to an increased risk of bleeding. The availability of direct oral anticoagulants offers new options for those with CKD. Until studies are available in stage 4 and 5/dialysis, this class of medication should be used with caution in this population. For anticoagulated patients requiring interventional procedures, a risk-based approach should be employed to determine those who will benefit from bridging anticoagulation. Either unfractionated heparin or low molecular weight heparin are adequate choices for bridging anticoagulation. Unfractionated heparin and renally dosed low molecular weight heparin can be safely used in non-end stage CKD patients with an acute coronary syndrome. Similarly, the use of unfractionated heparin and low molecular weight heparin are comparable for thromboembolic prophylaxis in CKD/dialysis and extracorporeal circuit anticoagulation of the dialysis circuit.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".