MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214749007 · doi:10.4088/pcc.21m02927

An Observational Study Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Conventional Anticoagulation Versus New Oral Anticoagulants in the Management of Cerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis

2021· article· en· W3214749007 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Primary Care Companion For CNS Disorders · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Venous Sinus Thrombosis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObservational studyCerebral venous sinus thrombosisProspective cohort studyVenous thrombosisThrombosisRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of conventional anticoagulants with new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) for management of cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST). Methods: This was a retrospective, prospective cohort study of patients who presented with CVST to a tertiary stroke center in the Middle East from January 2012 to October 2019. Patients with a diagnosis of CVST were identified, and data were analyzed for demographic characteristics. Specific consideration was given to compare the efficacy and safety of different anticoagulation treatments. Results: A total of 36 patients were included in the final analysis, with 15 (41%) men and 21 (59%) women and a male to female ratio of 1:1.4. Most of the patients (n = 22, 61%) were Saudi. Their ages ranged between 15 and 82 years (mean ± SD age of 34.22 ± 13.16 years). Headache was the most common feature, present in 22 (61%) of the patients, followed by unilateral weakness in 15 (41%) and cranial nerve palsies in 11 (30%). The most common etiology was prothrombotic state (both hereditary and acquired thrombophilia: n = 16, 45%). Other etiologies were postpartum state/oral contraceptive pill usage in 7 (19%), infections in 7 (19%), and trauma in 3 (8%). Most of the patients (n = 24, 67%) still received conventional anticoagulation (warfarin/low molecular weight heparin), but 9 (25%) of the patients consented to start NOACs. Efficacy (as measured by clinical improvement plus rate of recanalization of previously thrombosed venous sinuses) showed no statistically significant difference, although it proved to be better tolerated, as none of the patients stopped the treatment due to adverse events and risk of major bleeding was significantly low in the NOAC group. Nine patients in the warfarin group stopped medication, while none in the NOAC group did so (P = .034). Conclusion: NOACs were found to be at least as good as conventional anticoagulation for the management of CVST. However, efficacy was almost similar, a finding that is consistent with most of the published case series and the few recently published prospective studies. Larger prospective and population-based studies are needed to clarify our preliminary results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.487

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.232 · 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