Safety of Venous Thromboprophylaxis With Low‐molecular‐weight Heparin in Children With Ulcerative Colitis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate for increased rectal bleeding following enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in children hospitalized for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study (2007--2016) of 218 inpatients with active UC. Patients receiving enoxaparin were compared with a nonenoxaparin-treated patient group. Severity of UC was determined using the Pediatric Ulcerative Colitis Activity Index (PUCAI). Hemoglobin (Hb) values and packed red blood cell (pRBC) transfusions were reviewed for a 7-day period following hospital admission. A linear mixed effect model was used to compare change in Hb values between the groups. Risk of pRBC transfusion was compared using a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazard regression. A sub-analysis was also conducted restricting to patients with severe UC to provide more generalizable insight into safety profile of enoxaparin. RESULTS: Children hospitalized for UC and receiving enoxaparin were more likely to have severe disease, received infliximab therapy and be admitted after 2010. Use of enoxaparin showed there was not a difference (P = 0.60) in the fall of Hb detected among those with acute severe colitis (initial PUCAI ≥65) during the week following admission. Moreover, there was no difference in the risk of requiring a pRBC transfusion with enoxaparin use (log-rank test all patients: P = 0.80; severe UC: P = 0.88; Cox proportional hazard regression all patients: P = 0.72; severe UC: 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in Hb levels or need for blood transfusions in children hospitalized for severe UC (PUCAI ≥65) whether or not they received enoxaparin for thromboembolism prophylaxis.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".