Efficacy and safety of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants post-kidney transplantation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) were developed as alternatives to vitamin K antagonists, primarily warfarin, as they do not require routine monitoring and have limited drug-drug and drug-food interactions. However, the efficacy and safety of these agents in kidney transplantation are not well studied. AIM: To assess the profile and safety of NOACs for patients who had kidney transplantation, and to provide recommendations and guidelines on therapeutic strategies in these patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective study carried out among adult patients who were actively on the following NOACs (apixaban, rivaroxaban or dabigatran) in our renal transplantation program from December 2015 to December 2016. The patients were identified primarily through electronic medical record system (patient data linkage). Data on the clinical and laboratory profile of the patients were retrieved and analyzed with SPSS 22.0. RESULTS: = 0.232). CONCLUSION: No thromboembolic events or significant changes in renal profile were observed in our cohort of kidney transplant recipients who were treated with NOACs for at least a year. However, a few bleeding events were observed. This calls for further well-planned randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of NOACs among renal transplant recipients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it