How can the results of the COMPASS trial benefit patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease in Poland?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aspirin decreases the risk of recurrent thrombotic events in patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease but the risk of recurrent events remains high. Long‑term dual antiplatelet therapy or the combination of aspirin and warfarin further reduces the risk of recurrent events, but at the cost of increased bleeding, and neither of these treatments reduce mortality. The COMPASS (Cardiovascular Outcomes in People Using Anticoagulation Strategies) randomized controlled trial involving 27 395 patients from 602 sites in 33 countries (Poland: 9 sites, 518 patients) tested whether low‑dose anticoagulant therapy with the coagulation factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban given alone or combined with aspirin reduced thrombotic risk compared with aspirin in patients with apparently stable chronic coronary and/or peripheral artery disease. In patients treated with the combination of rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily and aspirin 100 mg once daily, compared with aspirin alone, the primary outcome of the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction was decreased by 24% (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.66 to 0.86; P <0.001), and mortality by 18% at the cost of a 70% increase in major bleeding but no significant increase in fatal or intracranial bleeding. Results were consistent in patients with coronary artery disease or peripheral artery disease, and the greatest absolute benefit was evident in the highest risk patients, including those with polyvascular disease, mild or moderate heart failure, chronic kidney disease, or diabetes. These results establish the combination of low‑dose rivaroxaban and aspirin as a highly effective treatment to decrease morbidity and mortality rates in patients with atherosclerotic vascular disease..
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 | 0.028 | 0.070 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| 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".