MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205387447 · doi:10.1136/bmj.n2400

Effectiveness of therapeutic heparin versus prophylactic heparin on death, mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission in moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital: RAPID randomised clinical trial

2021· article· en· W3205387447 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Michelle Sholzberg, Grace H. Tang, Hassan Rahhal, Musaad AlHamzah, Lisa Baumann Kreuziger, Fionnuala Ní Áinle, Faris Alomran, Khalid Alayed, Mohammed AlSheef, Fahad AlSumait, Carlos Eduardo Pompílio, Catherine Sperlich, Sabrena Tangri, Terence Tang, Peter Jaksa, Deepa Suryanarayan, Mozah Almarshoodi, Lana A. Castellucci, Paula D. James, David Lillicrap, Marc Carrier, Andrew Beckett, Christos Colovos, Jai Jayakar, Marie-Pier Arsenault, Cynthia Wu, Karine Doyon, Εleni Andreou, Vera Dounaevskaia, Eric Tseng, Gloria Lim, Michael Fralick, Saskia Middeldorp, Agnes Lee, Fei Zuo, Bruno R. da Costa, Kevin E. Thorpe, Elnara Márcia Negri, Mary Cushman, Peter Jüni

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
Canadian institutionsVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteSinai Health SystemUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-RosemontSouthlake Regional Health CenterCanadian Armed ForcesQueen's UniversityUniversity of OttawaUniversity of Alberta HospitalCentre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-AppalachesLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaOttawa HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaSt Joseph's Health CentreUniversity of CalgaryToronto East General HospitalHôpital Charles-Le MoyneUniversity of TorontoTrillium Health CentrePublic Health OntarioWilliam Osler Health SystemSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesDeanship of Scientific Research, King Saud UniversitySoutheastern Ontario Academic Medical OrganizationIDA IrelandScience Foundation IrelandNational Institutes of HealthKing Saud UniversityOttawa Hospital FoundationEnterprise Ireland
KeywordsMedicineHeparinMechanical ventilationIntensive care unitAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of therapeutic heparin compared with prophylactic heparin among moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital wards. DESIGN: Randomised controlled, adaptive, open label clinical trial. SETTING: 28 hospitals in Brazil, Canada, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and US. PARTICIPANTS: 465 adults admitted to hospital wards with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels were recruited between 29 May 2020 and 12 April 2021 and were randomly assigned to therapeutic dose heparin (n=228) or prophylactic dose heparin (n=237). INTERVENTIONS: Therapeutic dose or prophylactic dose heparin (low molecular weight or unfractionated heparin), to be continued until hospital discharge, day 28, or death. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of death, invasive mechanical ventilation, non-invasive mechanical ventilation, or admission to an intensive care unit, assessed up to 28 days. The secondary outcomes included all cause death, the composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation, and venous thromboembolism. Safety outcomes included major bleeding. Outcomes were blindly adjudicated. RESULTS: . At 28 days, the primary composite outcome had occurred in 37/228 patients (16.2%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 52/237 (21.9%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (odds ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.43 to 1.10; P=0.12). Deaths occurred in four patients (1.8%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 18 patients (7.6%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.22, 0.07 to 0.65; P=0.006). The composite of all cause death or any mechanical ventilation occurred in 23 patients (10.1%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and 38 (16.0%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.59, 0.34 to 1.02; P=0.06). Venous thromboembolism occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and six (2.5%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.34, 0.07 to 1.71; P=0.19). Major bleeding occurred in two patients (0.9%) assigned to therapeutic heparin and four (1.7%) assigned to prophylactic heparin (0.52, 0.09 to 2.85; P=0.69). CONCLUSIONS: In moderately ill patients with covid-19 and increased D-dimer levels admitted to hospital wards, therapeutic heparin was not significantly associated with a reduction in the primary outcome but the odds of death at 28 days was decreased. The risk of major bleeding appeared low in this trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04362085.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.482
Teacher spread0.331 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations371
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicCOVID-19 Clinical Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207