The Unmet Need for Extended Thromboprophylaxis in Acutely Ill Medical Patients: The Findings of IMPROVE, ENDORSE and EXCLAIM.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction: Findings from the recent EXCLAIM study demonstrate that selected acutely ill medical patients with reduced mobility benefit from extended-duration enoxaparin venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis (Blood2007;110:1862). However, it is unknown whether the EXCLAIM population is representative of acutely ill medical patients admitted to hospitals worldwide. In this subanalysis, we assessed whether the EXCLAIM population was representative of the medical patients enrolled in the multinational IMPROVE (Chest2007;132:936–45) and ENDORSE (Lancet2008;371:387–94) registries known to be at risk for VTE. Methods: Using patient data from IMPROVE and ENDORSE, we applied the EXCLAIM eligibility criteria to a representative, multinational population of acutely ill medical patients at risk for VTE. The IMPROVE and ENDORSE studies assessed VTE-risk and prophylaxis use of enrolled patients according to the 2004 American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) guidelines (Chest2004;126:338S–400S). ACCP criteria for VTE risk were met in 46% (6,907/15,156) of IMPROVE and 43% (15,487/36,351) of ENDORSE study patients (Chest2007;132:936–45; Lancet2008;371:387–94). The EXCLAIM eligibility criteria required patients to be confined to total bed rest (level 1 immobility), or bed rest with bathroom privileges (level 2 immobility) and have at least 1 of 3 predefined risk factors for VTE (i.e., age > 75 years; history of VTE; active or prior cancer). Results: EXCLAIM eligibility criteria were met in 30% (2,072/6,907) IMPROVE and 36% (5,535/15,487) ENDORSE medical patients considered at risk for VTE by ACCP. During hospitalization, ACCP-recommended prophylaxis was provided to 69% (1,426/2,072) and 46% (2,548/5,535) of EXCLAIM-eligible patients enrolled in IMPROVE and ENDORSE, respectively. Following discharge from hospital (median length of stay 5 days for US, 8 days for non-US), only 9% (153/1,719) of EXCLAIM-eligible patients in the IMPROVE study received any type of ACCP-recommended VTE prophylaxis. Conclusions: Evidence from the EXCLAIM study demonstrated that the benefit-to-risk ratio in selected hospitalized medical patients favors the use of prolonged VTE prophylaxis. This population corresponds to one in three of the representative hospitalized patients with acute medical illness enrolled in IMPROVE and ENDORSE. Data on prophylaxis use from the IMPROVE registry suggest that only 9% of such patients are currently receiving optimal VTE prophylaxis following hospital discharge.
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 | 0.009 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".