Broadening the Categories of Patients Eligible for Extended Venous Thromboembolism Treatment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, venous thromboembolism (VTE) resulting from major transient risk factors (e.g., surgery or trauma) or a major persistent risk factor such as cancer, has been defined as being provoked, whereas unprovoked VTE encompasses events without an identifiable cause. These categorizations influence anticoagulant treatment duration; unlike VTE provoked by major transient risk factors, extended anticoagulation beyond 3 months is advised for patients with cancer or unprovoked VTE due to risk persistence after treatment cessation. However, some patients with VTE provoked by minor transient or minor persistent risk factors may also be candidates for extended anticoagulation therapy due to the continuing risk of recurrence. In patients who require extended therapy, vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are effective but are associated with an increased risk of bleeding and various treatment burdens (e.g., anticoagulation monitoring and dose adjustment). Evaluations of extended VTE treatment with the less-burdensome direct oral anticoagulants such as apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban, and rivaroxaban show that they are at least as safe and effective as VKAs in a broad range of patients. In addition, apixaban and rivaroxaban offer more than one dosing option, allowing tailoring of treatment to the patient's specific risk factor profile. Analysis of more granular definitions for risk factor groupings has also yielded vital information on the most appropriate strategies for the treatment of patients with specific risk factors, highlighting that extended anticoagulation treatment may benefit those with minor transient and persistent environmental and nonenvironmental risk factors who commonly receive shorter-duration therapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".